Rijksuniversiteit Groningen

ivem

Centrum voor Energie en Milieukunde

Evaluation of Options for Reduction of Greenhouse gas Emissions by Changes in Household Consumption Patterns S. Nonhebel H.C. Moll

Final report to the NRP of the GreenHouse Project

IVEM-ONDERZOEKSRAPPORT NO. 106

2

Evaluation of Options for Reduction of Greenhouse gas Emissions by Changes in Household Consumption Patterns

Final report to the NRP of the GreenHouse project

S. Nonhebel H.C. Moll

IVEM-onderzoeksrapport nr. 106 Groningen, juli 2001 3

The Greenhouse project was carried out in the framework of the Dutch National Research Programme on Global Air Pollution and Climat Change, registered under nr. 95216 Rijkstuniversiteit Groningen IVEM, Centrum voor Energie en Milieukunde Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Tel. 050-3634609 Fax. 050-3637168 Homepage: http://www.fwn.rug.nl/ivem/home.htm ISBN 90 367 1457 5

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 7 Samenvatting .................................................................................................................................. 9 Summary ................................................................................................................................ 15 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 21 1.1 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions and their relationship with household consumption ................................................................................................................ 21 1.2 Description of direct and indirect energy requirement of households .................................. 23 1.3 Research questions concerning the potential for reduction of future greenhouse gas emissions in households. ...................................................................................... 24 1.4 Research goals and structure of the GreenHouse project..................................................... 25 1.5 Project team and time schedule.......................................................................................... 26 1.6 Main goal of the report and its structure............................................................................. 27 1.7 Literature referred in chapter 1 .......................................................................................... 30 2. An interdisciplinary perspective to assess and evaluate reduction options on the household level .......................................................................................................... 31 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 31 2.2 Energy analysis ................................................................................................................. 31 2.3 Household analysis............................................................................................................ 34 2.4 Integration of the energy analysis and the household analysis............................................. 36 2.5 Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 38 2.6 Project publications used as basis for this chapter .............................................................. 38 3. Household practices and their consequences for energy requirements ........................ 39 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 39 3.2 The activity category of feeding ........................................................................................ 40 3.3 The activity category of clothing ....................................................................................... 43 3.4 Concluding remarks .......................................................................................................... 47 3.5 Project publications used as basis for this chapter .............................................................. 48 4. Energy requirements of products and services purchased by the households .............. 49 4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 49 4.2 Food products ................................................................................................................... 49 4.3 Clothes ............................................................................................................................. 55 4.4 Flowers............................................................................................................................. 57 4.5 Leisure time ...................................................................................................................... 58 4.6 Possible changes in purchase behaviour............................................................................. 60 4.8 Concluding remarks .......................................................................................................... 61 4.9 Project publications used as basis for this chapter .............................................................. 62 5. Impact of implementing the options for national GHG emissions .............................. 65 5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 65 5. 2 Method ............................................................................................................................. 66 5. 3 Description of the options and their effects in I/O-models terms......................................... 68 5.3 Supply side reduction options............................................................................................ 74 5.4 Integration of the results at different levels of scale............................................................ 75 5.5 Concluding remarks .......................................................................................................... 77 5.6 Project publications used as basis for this chapter .............................................................. 77 6. Implementation of the options in households............................................................. 79 6.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 79 6.2 The activity categories feeding and clothing ...................................................................... 80 6.3 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 83 6.4 Options in relation to each other ........................................................................................ 84 6.5 Choice for options and household characteristics ............................................................... 86 6.6 Discussion and concluding remarks ................................................................................... 87 6.7 Project publications used as basis for this chapter .............................................................. 88 7. Evaluation of the results ........................................................................................... 89 7.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 89 7.2 Contribution of other GHGs to the overall GHG-emission attributed to consumer goods..... 89 7.3 European comparison........................................................................................................ 93 7.4 Comparison with results from other Dutch research projects ............................................ 102 7.5 Project publications used as basis for this chapter ............................................................ 109

5

8.

Conclusion and recommendations........................................................................... 111 8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 111 8.2 Discussion of main project findings................................................................................. 111 8.3 Explanation of the current low acceptance of GHG-emission reduction options by households............................................................................................................................. 113 8.4 Implications relevant for national GHG-emission reduction aims ..................................... 115 8.5 Recommendations........................................................................................................... 118 8.6 Close............................................................................................................................... 120 8.7 Project publications referred to in this chapter.................................................................. 120 Appendix 1 Project Description................................................................................................. 121 Appendix 2 Publications published in the context of the GreenHouse project. ............................ 131 Appendix 3 Co-ordination with other projects and programmes ................................................. 137 Appendix 4 .............................................................................................................................. 139

6

ABSTRACT

The Lifestyle project (funded in NRP-1) studied energy requirements of entire household consumption patterns. There, it was concluded that a substantial reduction potential existed for the total household energy requirement and related greenhouse gas emissions. The GreenHouse project, reported in here, paid attention to the possibilities of achieving this potential and the effects thereof on the households and the production sectors. The research question required integration of methodologies originating from both energy studies as well as household studies. A large number of reduction options within the present household practices were identified, including changes in purchase behaviour and changes in household behaviour. Implementation of all these options would result in a 27 % reduction of the national emissions by the Netherlands. Implementation of feasible efficiency improvements in the production sectors would result in a 30 % reduction of national emissions. The combination of both reduction routes would result in a 54 % reduction of the national emissions. Which shows the existence of a large potential for change. However, it is found that the general acceptance of the suggested options by households is low. The findings imply that the feasible reduction as a result of changing consumption patterns lies in order of 5%. Further research showed that households face several constraints to change to an energy efficient lifestyle. Firstly necessary knowledge is lacking. Secondly the opportunities to purchase efficient household appliances are limited. Thirdly present infrastructures impede households to chose an energy efficient lifestyle and social norms are limiting individual households to adopt an environmental friendly behaviour. The knowledge obtained with respect to constraints perceived in households is used to formulate recommendations to improve feasibility of energy efficient lifestyles.

7

8

SAMENVATTING

Het

Nederlandse

beleid

met

betrekking

tot

het

verminderen

van

de

broeikasgasemissies op nationaal niveau heeft ertoe geleid, dat er in de afgelopen jaren veel aandacht is besteed aan de mogelijkheden om energie te besparen. Er zijn energiebesparingsprogramma’s ontwikkeld voor de verschillende sectoren binnen de economie zoals de industrie en voor de huishoudens. Uit eerder onderzoek is echter gebleken dat besparingen in een bepaalde sector niet altijd leiden tot reductie van energiegebruik op nationaal niveau. Dit komt doordat besparingen in een bepaalde sector kunnen leiden tot een toename van het energiegebruik ergens anders in de samenleving. (De productie van een zuinige auto kost bijvoorbeeld meer energie dan de productie van een conventionele auto). Om inzicht te krijgen in de emissies op nationaal niveau is het van belang om met dit soort verschuivingen tussen de sectoren rekening te houden. In de afgelopen jaren zijn er methodes ontwikkeld waarmee het energiegebruik op nationaal niveau bestudeerd kan worden. Deze methodes vinden hun oorsprong in de economische wetenschap: men gaat ervan uit dat alle productie in een economie ten dienste staat van de consumptie (over het algemeen de huishoudens). De energie die gebruikt wordt in de productiesectoren is nodig om de consumptiesector van goederen te kunnen voorzien. Dit betekent dat de energie die in de productiesectoren gebruikt wordt, kan worden afgebeeld op de huishoudelijke consumptie. Vanuit dit uitgangspunt zijn er bij de huishoudens twee energiestromen te onderscheiden: de directe energie en de indirecte energie. De directe energie is de energie die huishoudens gebruiken in de vorm van energiedragers zoals gas, elektriciteit, benzine etc. De indirecte energiestroom is de energie die nodig was om de producten die het huishouden aanschaft te produceren. Het totale energiegebruik van een willekeurig huishouden is de combinatie van die twee. Het totale energiegebruik van alle huishoudens is de energie die nodig is voor de totale nationale huishoudelijke consumptie. Door op deze manier naar het energiegebruik van sectoren en huishoudens te kijken wordt afwenteling tussen sectoren in kaart gebracht. (Het verwarmen van een kant-enklaar-maaltijd in de magnetron vraagt weinig directe energie, de indirecte energie in de aangeschafte maaltijd is echter heel groot, hierdoor is de totale energie van die maaltijd veel groter is dan van een vergelijkbare zelfgemaakte maaltijd.) 9

In NRP-1, zijn er binnen het zogenaamde Lifestyle project methodes ontwikkeld om het directe en indirecte energiegebruik van huishoudens te bepalen. Uit dat onderzoek kwam naar voren dat het directe energiegebruik van Nederlandse huishoudens ongeveer 110 GJ/huishouden/jaar bedraagt en het indirecte 130 GJ/huishouden/jaar. De directe en indirecte energiestroom zijn dus ongeveer even groot. Daarnaast bleek dat er grote verschillen tussen individuele huishoudens bestonden m.b.t. het energiegebruik. (Een afwijking van 25% van het gemiddelde werd gevonden). Hieruit werd geconcludeerd dat er een groot potentieel voor energiereductie bestaat binnen de huishoudens. Deze conclusie was de aanleiding voor het in dit rapport beschreven GreenHouse project. In het GreenHouse project is dit potentieel nader bestudeerd: de plaatsen/momenten in de huishoudelijke praktijk waar energiebesparingen zouden kunnen plaatsvinden zijn geïnventariseerd en de gevolgen van de implementatie van een energiezuinige levensstijl voor het huishouden en de rest van de economie zijn onderzocht. Het onderzoek vond plaats op twee niveaus: aan de ene kant op het niveau van de huishoudens (wat zijn de belemmeringen voor het invoeren van een energiezuinige levensstijl) en aan de andere kant op het niveau van de nationale economie (wat zijn de consequenties voor de nationale broeikasgasemissies indien alle huishoudens in Nederland zich een energiezuinige levensstijl aanmeten). Om deze vragen te beantwoorden was het nodig om kennis van de energieanalyse die in het vorige Lifestyle project ontwikkeld was te integreren met de kennis en methodieken die gebruikt worden in de huishoudwetenschappen. Gedurende het hele project is steeds veel aandacht aanbesteed aan het integreren van deze twee wetenschappelijke disciplines. In het project zijn verschillende onderzoeksfasen te onderscheiden. In de eerste fase is er onderzoek gedaan naar de huidige huishoudpraktijk en de hoeveelheid energie die nodig was om de diverse handelingen te verrichten. (Hoe vaak doen huishoudens hun boodschappen, welk vervoermiddel gebruiken ze hiervoor, op welke manier wordt voedsel bewaard, hoe wordt er gekookt en afgewassen etc.) Om afwenteling te voorkomen werd steeds naar de hele activiteit gekeken. Met deze informatie zijn vervolgens besparingsopties ontwikkeld. Dit zijn veranderingen in het huishouden die leiden tot een verlaging van het totale energiegebruik van dat huishouden (dus indirect en direct samen). 10

In de volgende fase zijn deze besparingsopties gekwantificeerd. Dat wil zeggen dat de hoeveelheid energie die bespaard wordt op nationaal niveau als alle huishoudens de optie invoeren werd berekend. Het uitgangspunt was de huidige situatie. (Het niet meer gebruiken van een wasdroger leidt alleen tot energievermindering in huishoudens die een wasdroger hebben en gebruiken). Alleen opties die een besparing van meer dan 0.5 % van jaarlijkse emissies tot gevolg hadden zijn meegenomen in het vervolgonderzoek. Tabel 1 geeft een overzicht van de besparingsopties. In deze tabel is te zien dat er eigenlijk in alle activiteiten binnen het huishouden veranderingen mogelijk zijn die tot een verlaging van het energiegebruik kunnen leiden. De besparingsopties variëren van minder vlees eten en andere cadeautjes kopen tot minder ver met vakantie gaan. Er moet nog worden opgemerkt dat bij het ontwerpen van de opties steeds geprobeerd is om de veranderingen voor het huishouden niet te groot te laten zijn. (In plaats van omschakelen naar een compleet vegetarisch dieet, wordt er voorgesteld om een dag in de week geen vlees te eten en in plaats van de auto helemaal de deur uit om 500 km per jaar minder te rijden). De opties in tabel 1 kunnen elkaar qua effect beïnvloeden waardoor de resultaten niet zonder meer bij elkaar opgeteld kunnen worden. Het verplaatsen van de vriezer naar de kelder is een besparingsoptie (het energiegebruik van een vriezer wordt kleiner wanneer hij op een koele plaats staat). De aanschaf van een energiezuinige vriezer is ook een optie. Als beiden geïmplementeerd worden in een huishouden (dus een energiezuinige vriezer in de kelder) dan is de energiebesparing echter minder dan de som van de opties samen. Wanneer rekening wordt gehouden met de onderlinge beïnvloeding van de individuele opties blijkt de totale besparing na het implementeren van alle opties 27 % te bedragen. Dus door de invoering van een heleboel kleine veranderingen in de huishoudpraktijk is het mogelijk om de emissies op nationaal niveau met een kwart te reduceren. Zoals al eerder is gemeld, wordt het indirecte energiegebruik van een huishouden bepaald door de producten die worden aangeschaft. Een huishouden kan in principe kiezen voor producten met een lage indirecte energie, maar kan geen invloed uitoefenen op het productieproces. Veranderingen in het productieproces (verbetering van de energie-efficiëntie) leiden echter wel tot veranderingen in het indirecte energiegebruik van de huishoudens. De invloed van deze efficiëntieverbetering in de 11

productiesectoren op het huishoudelijk energiegebruik is daarom ook onderzocht in dit project. Implementatie van energiebesparingen in alle sectoren leidt tot reductie van 30% van de emissies. De combinatie van zowel veranderingen in de huishoudens en efficiëntieverbetering in de industrie leidt tot een reductie van 54 % van de emissies op nationaal niveau. Ook op dit niveau vindt weer beïnvloeding plaats, waardoor het totale effect kleiner is dan de som van de individuele veranderingen. Voor de teelt van kasgroenten is veel energie nodig, huishoudens kunnen veel energie besparen door geen kasgroenten meer te kopen. Efficiëntieverbetering in de kasteelt leidt tot verlaging van het indirect energiegebruik van kasgroenten en de besparing die door de huishoudens kan worden behaald door geen kasgroenten meer te eten wordt hierdoor kleiner. Het totale reductiepotentieel van 54% van de nationale emissies is opmerkelijk groot. De invoering van heel veel kleine veranderingen in de huishoudens en efficiëntieverbetering in de industrie kunnen de emissies op nationaal niveau halveren. Om deze halvering te halen moeten wel alle voorgestelde veranderingen geïmplementeerd worden. De haalbaarheid van de veranderingen in de huishoudens werd onderzocht in de derde fase van het project. Met behulp van een enquête onder 350 huishoudens is nagegaan in hoeverre huishoudens bereid zijn om voorgestelde veranderingen door te voeren, daarnaast werd geïnventariseerd waarom men bepaalde besparingsopties als niet haalbaar beschouwde. Uit deze enquêtes kwam naar voren dat eigenlijk geen van de onderzochte opties door alle huishoudens gezien werd als haalbaar. In het gunstigste geval noemde 30% van de huishoudens de voorgestelde verandering implementeerbaar. Opties die te maken hebben met de aanschaf van energie-efficiënte apparatuur worden over het algemeen als haalbaar gezien, hun implementatie heeft ook weinig gevolgen voor het gedrag van de huishoudens. Daarnaast zijn opties haalbaar waarin bestaand gedrag geïntensifieerd wordt: gezinnen die al regelmatig vegetarisch eten, willen dat best vaker doen. Opties die te maken hebben met verandering/vermindering van de mobiliteit worden over het algemeen als niet haalbaar gezien.

De resultaten van de enquêtes onder de huishoudens laten zien dat emissieverlaging door verandering in de huishoudens aanzienlijk lager is dan op basis van het 12

potentieel te verwachten was. Er wordt geschat dat in de praktijk een 5% verlaging het hoogst haalbare is. De resultaten van de enquête leveren echter wel aanwijzingen op over de manier waarop deze 5% reductie misschien beïnvloed kan worden. In de eerste plaats werd gevonden dat in de meeste huishoudens niet voldoende kennis aanwezig is om energie-efficiënte keuzen te kunnen maken. (Een opvallend voorbeeld is dat de energielabelling van witgoed nauwelijks bekend blijkt te zijn, ook waren er veel huishoudens die niet op de hoogte waren van het bestaan van groene stroom.) Een verbetering van de kennis van huishoudens op dit gebied lijkt dan ook essentieel. Uit het onderzoek kwam ook naar voren dat de huishoudens onderling erg verschillen en dat er nauwelijks algemeen geldende adviezen te geven zijn. Huishoudens moeten dus haast individueel, met pasklare oplossingen benaderd worden. Een derde uitkomst is dat de keuzevrijheid van huishoudens voor een energiezuinige leefstijl sterk beperkt wordt door de bestaande infrastructuur en sociaal/culturele normen van de samenleving. Voor een huishouden op het platteland is overstappen op het openbaar vervoer bijvoorbeeld niet een haalbaar alternatief voor de personen auto. ‘Kledingvoorschriften’ op het werk maken dat men niet de vrijheid heeft om te kiezen voor energiezuinige opties. Samenvattend kan geconcludeerd worden dat er binnen de huishoudens in principe heel veel mogelijkheden zijn om het energiebeslag en de daarbij behorende broeikasgasemissies te verminderen. De invoering van de voorgestelde veranderingen heeft echter gevolgen voor de efficiëntie het huishouden (kost bijvoorbeeld meer tijd). Dit maakt dat huishoudens deze veranderingen niet zonder meer zullen implementeren. Zolang milieueffecten van keuzen eigenlijk nergens in de samenleving als doorslaggevende factor beschouwd worden (economische groei is belangrijker, bereikbaarheid/mobiliteit is belangrijker etc.), zullen huishoudens verlaging van de huishoud- efficiëntie ten gunste van het milieu niet snel accepteren.

13

Tabel 1 Overzicht van de reductieopties

Voedsel Minder kasgroenten Minder vlees (100 i.p.v. 120 gr) Meer vegetarisch Boodschappen doen op fiets Bezorgdienst gebruiken Koelkast en vriezer naar de kelder Efficiëntere koelkast/vriezer Overschakelen van elektrisch naar gas Met de hand afwassen Minder voorspoelen met warm water Efficiëntere vaatwasser Kleding Alle synthetische kleding vervangen door katoen Schoenen langer dragen (betere kwaliteit kopen) Minder vaak wassen/ langer dragen kleding Efficiëntere wasmachine Efficiëntere droger Drogen aan de lijn Wasmachine delen ander huishouden Hogere kwaliteit wasmachine/droger (langere levensduur) Woning Efficiëntere verwarming/warmwatervoorziening Lagere kamertemperatuur Spaarlampen Natuurlijke vloerbedekking Levensduur verlenging meubels (kwaliteit) Snijbloemen vervangen door bijv. kunst Overigen Delen kranten/tijdschriften met ander huishouden Delen gereedschap Delen caravan Andere geschenken dan snijbloemen Vakantie dichterbij Vakantie met trein Vakantie niet in hotel

14

SUMMARY

The Dutch government aims at fulfilling the international commitments with respect to a reduction of the nation wide emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Reduction of the energy consumption is an important option to reduce these emissions. The awareness of the necessity of energy conservation led to several conservation programs. Most of these programs only consider the potential for energy savings at the level of individual production sectors and individual consumption items. Implementing energy conservation potential into one specific sector (on the micro level) may lead to increased energy consumption elsewhere within the production and consumption chain. For instance, the production of cars with a lightweight material composition (high content of aluminium or magnesium) in order to reduce the energy requirements whilst driving, results in a higher energy requirement and higher GHGemission levels in material production sectors. This so-called problem shifting and burden shifting effect is a widely known problem, which results from micro level optimisation approaches. Therefore, in order to research energy reduction potential on the national scale, a more integrative approach is required, which addresses the macro level relationships between various sectors and the relation between production and consumption. Over the last decade, methodological approaches have been developed to study such energy use patterns at a national scale. These approaches adopt the central assumption that all production activities take place to serve consumption. This assumption implies that all energy used within an economy can be allocated to final consumers. The collective household sector forms the main final consumption sector. Therefore, the energy used in various production sectors in the economy is re-attributed to the households in accordance with the amounts of goods and services purchased by those households. From this methodological perspective, two flows of energy into the households are distinguished. Firstly, direct energy requirement, which sums up the energy used by the households in the form of energy carriers such as natural gas, electricity and petrol. Secondly, the indirect energy requirement, which sums up the energy attributed in the production and distribution of goods and services purchased by the households. The total energy consumption of a household is the sum of both indirect and direct totals. 15

During the first phase of the National Research Programme on Global Air Pollution and Climate Change (NRP-1) the Lifestyle project was performed (Biesiot & Moll, 1995). In that project the methodological approach mentioned above was developed and elaborated to several methodological tools used to quantify the direct and indirect energy-flow patterns in the economy, and to calculate the energy requirements related to household consumption items and the entire household consumption pattern. The total energy requirement of the average Dutch household amounted 240 GJ in 1990. This amount is split up in 110 GJ direct energy requirements and 130 GJ indirect energy requirements. It was also found that large differences exist between households (differences of up to 25% were found). It was concluded that a substantial reduction potential existed for the household energy requirement. This conclusion generated new research questions: what are the possibilities of implementing this potential and what are the effects of such policies on the household, the production sectors and society in general. Analysis at two levels is required to answer these questions. At the household level the consequences for household behaviour and their related acceptance for low energy consumption patterns should be determined. At the national level it is necessary to study the effects of changes within the household consumption patterns on the rest of the economy as well as the effect of changes in production and service sectors on the total energy requirement of households.

In the GreenHouse project these questions were studied applying

methods and knowledge from both energy analysis as from household analysis. Besides the CO2 emissions that occur mainly from fossil fuel combustion also emissions of other greenhouse gasses are taken into account. In practice this means that a large number of changes within the present household practices are identified that may lead to reductions of GHG-emissions. These changes could include change in purchase behaviour (other products) change in household behaviour (apply line drying) or a combination (change of menu composition). These changes were designed in such way that impact on household behaviour was relativity small (instead of change to a complete vegetarian lifestyle just less meat was suggested). In the next step the options considered were quantified: the reduction of GHGemissions due to implementation of options by all households was calculated.

16

In the following step only options that lead to larger reductions than 0.5-1% of the emissions were taken into account. These options are mentioned in table 1. This overview shows that reductions can be achieved in nearly all activities within the households varying from purchase of other presents, longer wearing of clothes and change in menu composition. The effect of implementation of all these options into all Dutch households was calculated using an input/output model. It was found that implementation of all the options resulted in a 27 % reduction of the GHG-emissions at the national level. From a national perspective, reduction of GHG-emissions can occur via two routes: via changes in the households, but also via changes in the production sectors. Households cannot affect production sectors, but improvements in these sectors affect household consumption since indirect energy requirements of products purchased decrease. When efficiency improvements in the production sectors are taken into account a 30 % reduction of national GHG-emissions is achieved. The combination of both results in an over 54 % reduction of the national GHG-emissions. This is a remarkable result since it shows that by introducing a large number of small changes in household behaviour a large reduction of the national GHG-emissions can be achieved. The actual reduction that can be obtained via this route depends on the number of households that are willing to change their behaviour (implement the suggested options). This was studied in the final part of this project, through a survey among 350 households. This survey showed that none of the options scored high levels of acceptance. The highest scores of acceptance are at a level of 30%. Options with a moderate acceptance level demonstrate some common characteristics; they increase the energetic efficiency (through modified appliances and lightning systems) and their implementation has few behavioural effects; or they intensify behaviour already present in the household (eating one more vegetarian meal per week in households which have already adopted a partly vegetarian diet). Important options with a (very) low acceptance level concern shifts in the mobility pattern or the abandonment of appliances, which already present in the household.

17

These findings imply that the current reduction of GHG-emissions, as a result of changing consumption patterns, lies in order of 5% (assuming that when households mention that they are accepting some options, they will definitely implement these). This relatively low acceptance of options was analysed in more detail. Households vary substantially in their activity patterns used to fulfil basic needs. Many options are therefore only relevant to a small minority of the households. Scarcity of resources, or the lack of relevant facilities within a specific household, impedes the effective implementation of options in many cases. In addition, lack of information and absence of relevant knowledge was found, primarily with regard to indirect energy embodied in products, which impede the households in making well-founded choices from an energy-reduction perspective. The present behaviour of a household is explained by the tendency to optimally apply the available household resources to attain a certain standard of living. Lack of acceptance of household behavioural change asked for environmental reasons should not be interpreted as a capricious, indolent or stubborn rejection of necessary transformation, but should be analysed as a source of conflicts with the current household strategy to meet its standard of living. The adoption of environmental friendly behaviour fits generally with the social norm to conserve the quality of environmental systems in order to guarantee the liveability of the world for present and future generations. However this socially accepted environmental norm competes with many other social cultural norms, rooted deeply in present society. For instance, GHG-emission reduction options which imply an increase of labour in the household or decrease the efficiency of the household organisation, are conflicting with the general trend of labour saving and efficiency increase in the society and with the high emphasis on maintaining enough time for leisure, sport and personal development. Another conflict is found with regard to options affecting mobility and holidays. The present social norm with regard to mobility, also embedded in the present infrastructure, is the free availability of car mobility. The norm with regard to holidays, also supported by the aviation tariffs, is the expansion of the personal horizon to a global level. So we can understand the low acceptance of the ‘mobility and holiday’ options in the research. In these cases the social norms with regard to mobility and holidays dominate totally the environmental norm. 18

Although for methodological reasons all emissions are attributed to consumption (=households), this does not imply that households are fully responsible for the total energy requirements related to household consumption, and that the households should carry the full burden of reducing energy use and GHG-emissions. The other sectors in society must attribute their share. As long as environmental norms are of limited importance within in society as a whole, individual households have not enough opportunities for an environmental friendly behaviour and reduction potentials will never be reached.

Concluding remarks and recommendations The research done within the GreenHouse project showed that a large potential for change exist within in the present household practices. When both in the consumption as in the production sectors energy efficient changes are incorporated an over 50% reduction of the GHG-emissions at national level can be achieved. However, the present situation in household makes that on the short term the expected reduction is much smaller. This is due to the fact that households face several limitations for adopting suggested changes. In the first place it is shown that necessary knowledge is lacking in the households. Secondly it is shown that households are willing to purchase efficient household appliances, but that their accessibility is limited. And at the third place that present infrastructures limit households in their opportunities to chose an energy efficient lifestyle. Results found are in accordance with other studies on this subject. To increase the feasibility of reduction options designed in this project the following recommendations are made: Households should have access to tailor made advise with respect their energy use (both direct and indirect). The production of energy efficient household appliances should be promoted. In decision processes with respect to infrastructure the effect on household practices should be included.

19

Table 1 Overview reduction options

Feeding No greenhouse vegetables Less meat More vegetarian Shopping on bicycle Use delivery service Refrigerate/freezer to cellar More efficient refrigerator/freezer Change from electric to natural gas Wash dishes by hand Less rinsing More efficient dishwasher Clothing Change from synthetic to cotton Longer wearing of shoes (better quality) Less frequent washing More efficient washing machine More efficient tumble dryer Apply line drying Sharing appliances other household Lifetime extension appliances Housing Efficient heating and hot water systems Lower room temperature Efficient lighting Natural floor covering Lifetime extension furniture Less cut flowers as decoration Other consumption Sharing daily and weekly papers with other household Sharing tools Sharing cars Driving less Sharing caravan Holiday nearby Holiday by train Other accommodation than hotels

20

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions and their relationship with household consumption

Observations carried out on the atmospheric concentration of gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) have demonstrated that the concentrations of these gasses have risen above natural levels and continue to rise. The enhanced concentration levels of these gases - further named in this report greenhouse gases or GHG, will probably influence global climate (IPCC, 1996). In 1997, international agreements were signed in Kyoto (UNFCCC, 1997) aimed at reducing emissions of greenhouse gases at a global level. The Dutch government aims to fulfil these international commitments (VROM, 1998), which imply a reduction of 6 % in national GHG emissions by the year 2010 (average of period 2008 – 2012) compared to the emissions recorded in 1990. Compared to the supposed results of a no greenhouse policy scenario (256 Mt/a CO2-eq. emissions in 2010) a reduction of about 20% should be achieved in the first decade of the 21st century (VROM, 1999). In the Netherlands, fossil fuels are the primary energy source and their combustion results the emission of large amounts of CO2. Therefore, reduction of the energy consumption is an important component in reducing GHG emissions. Additionally, in some sectors such as agriculture, fertiliser production, aluminium and magnesium production, substantial emissions also occur of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Awareness of the necessity of energy conservation has led to several conservation programs being implemented. Most of these programs only consider the potential of energy conservation at an individual industrial-sector level and on individual consumption items. Industrial sectors and consumption, however, are linked together, since industrial (production) sectors produce goods and services that are in turn processed in other sectors and afterward are eventually delivered to the consumer. Implementing energy conservation potential into one specific sector (on the micro level) may lead to increased energy consumption elsewhere within the production and consumption cycle. For instance, the production of cars with a lightweight material composition (high content of aluminium or magnesium) in order to reduce the energy requirements whilst driving, results in a higher energy requirement and higher GHG 21

emission levels in material production sectors. The problem shifting and burden shifting effect is a widely known problem and results from micro level optimisation approaches. Therefore, in order to research energy reduction potential on a national scale, a more integrative approach is required, which addresses the macro level relationships between various sectors and the relation between production and consumption. Over the last decade, methodological approaches have been developed to study such energy use patterns at a national scale. These approaches originate from economic theories, which split up economic activities into production and consumption. This approach adopts the central assumption that all production activities take place to serve consumption. This assumption implies that all energy used within an economy can be allocated to final consumers. The collective household sector forms the main final consumption sector. Therefore, the energy used in various production sectors in the economy is re-attributed to the households in accordance with the amounts of goods and services purchased by those households. Following such an approach, the complete chain is taken into account: the production of goods, the transport, trade and sale of goods, the energy required in the household to use or consume those goods and their final disposal. Studying complete chains related to final consumption substantially reduces the risk of problem shifting. From this methodological perspective, two flows of energy into the households are distinguished. Firstly, direct energy requirement, which sums up the energy used by the households in the form of energy carriers such as natural gas, electricity and petrol. Secondly, the indirect energy requirement, which sums up the energy attributed in the production and distribution of goods and services purchased by the households. The total energy consumption of a household is the sum of both indirect and direct totals. An important measure in assessing energy consequences of the deliveries between production sectors and of the deliveries by the production sectors to the final consumers is the energy intensity. Energy intensity is obtained by dividing the energy requirement of producing a good or service by the monetary value of this good or service (expressed in MJ/ƒ).

22

1.2

Description of direct and indirect energy requirement of households

During the first phase of the National Research Programme on Global Air Pollution and Climate Change (NRP-1) the Lifestyle project was performed (Biesiot & Moll, 1995). In that project the methodological approach mentioned above was developed and elaborated to several methodological tools used to quantify the direct and indirect energy-flow patterns in the economy, to calculate the energy requirements related to household consumption items and the entire household consumption pattern. For instance, the energy intensities and energy requirements associated with 350 consumption categories were determined, covering most household expenditures. The resulting data sets were made available through the EAP computer programme for analysis and storage of relevant data (Wilting et al., 1995). Based on this data, the aggregate values of both direct and indirect energy requirements of households in the Netherlands were calculated, and the influences of the main determinant variables, such as income and household composition, were established (Vringer & Blok, 1995; Biesiot & Moll, 1995). The main findings of the Lifestyle project are as follows: The total energy requirement of the average Dutch household amounted 240 GJ in 1990. This amount is split up in 110 GJ direct energy requirements and 130 GJ indirect energy requirements. Direct and indirect energy requirements of Dutch households proved to be more or less of equal importance. Large differences were found with regard to the total energy requirements of households. The level of expenditure appears to be an important determinant. By and large, a linear relationship was established between total energy requirements of a household and household expenditure, implying a constant energy intensity of consumption. In households with relatively high levels of expenditure, the share of indirect energy requirements is higher than in households with low levels of expenditure. It was also found that large differences exist between households with an equal level of expenditure with respect to their total energy requirements (differences of up to 25% from the mean value). Large differences between the energy intensities of consumption categories were found. For instance, the indirect energy requirement for food is substantial in absolute terms (more than 30% of total indirect energy requirements) and relative to its share 23

in total expenditures. These differences partly explain differences observed in household energy requirements. Based on a technical reduction possibility as well as reduction possibilities within the household by decreasing the energy intensity of the household consumption patterns, the Lifestyle project concluded that a substantial reduction potential exists at the household energy requirement level.

1.3

Research questions concerning the potential for reduction of future greenhouse gas emissions in households.

The potential for substantial reductions of household energy requirements and of associated GHG emissions by making changes in household consumption patterns generates new research questions. What are the possibilities of implementing that potential and what are the effects of such policies on the household, the production sectors and society in general? Analysis at two levels is required to answer these questions. At the micro-level, the consequences for household behaviour and the related acceptance for (parts of) low energy consumption patterns should be determined. Such research should be focussed on the construction of options, relevant at household level and resulting in decreases in energy requirements, on the determination of the potential consequences of the implementation of these options on household practices, and on measurement of the probabilty of adoption by households of these options. The methods developed and data obtained in the Lifestyle project, mainly directed at products, are partly useful in constructing feasible options for reduction of the total household energy requirement. The analysis of the role products and appliances play in the household is important. The interaction between products and appliances should also be considered. For instance, the use of some food items also imply the use of household appliances for cooling and cooking. To construct relevant options, consumption patterns and reduction options should be analysed on a functional and household level, rather than on a static product level. In addition, constraints for change should be assessed at the household level (lack of time, space or money) instead of merely the functional or product level. At the macro level, to avoid problem shifting or double counting, it is necessary to study the effects of 24

changes within the household consumption patterns on the rest of the economy as well, as the effect of (efficiency) changes in the production and service sectors on the total energy requirement of households. Additionally, the growing importance of the non-CO2 greenhouse gases in environmental policy should be addressed by the inclusion of their emission in the calculations and evaluation of viable options.

1.4

Research goals and structure of the GreenHouse project

Following the line of reasoning set down above, the GreenHouse project was initiated by IVEM-RUG, STS-UU and HCS-WAU and funded by the National Research Program of Global Air Pollution and Climate Change (second tranche). The aim of this research is the evaluation of options concerning the reduction of GHG emissions through changes in household consumption patterns. This project integrates the household energy-analysis methodology (already developed and applied in the Lifestyle project) with that of household-study methodology. This process enables an integrated evaluation of options, with regard to nationwide energy usage and GHG emission effects, as well as their effects on the household behaviour. This project approach may generate useful new insights applicable to the formulation of public climate policy directed at production sectors, consumers and the possible implementation of such policy. The research is structured in three phases. Micro-level identification and evaluation of reduction options at the household level. This phase formulates an integrated methodological framework that combines the method of energy life cycle analysis of consumption with household study methods aimed at providing a description and explanation of household behaviour and household consumption. Following this phase, analytical research is performed to identify reduction options of specific functions and activity categories such as feeding, household decoration, clothing and leisure etc. In addition, fieldwork is carried out observing relevant household-activity categories in order to identify the required household resources (space, time, money, skills) and to analyse potential repercussions for the quality of life within the household after implementation of some interesting options. The final result of this phase is the production of an inventory of potential options aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the 25

provision of indications concerning the acceptability of those options to the household members. Macro-level analysis of the combination of options at household level combined with technical energy saving options in the production and service sectors. Firstly, a quantitative assessment is performed on the consequences of the implementation of individual option and the complete set of options on the level of households and on the production sectors. Next, an assessment is made of the consequences that efficiency and structural changes performed elsewhere in the economy would have on total household energy requirements and emissions; and of the interactions between household level changes and production level changes on the total energy usage and emissions of Dutch society as a whole. This phase aims to produce an overview of the macro-level impacts of altering consumption patterns and of other economic and technical developments on future greenhouse gas emissions. Integration. In this phase the results of the different subprojects are integrated into the framework established in phase one and recommendations for public policy development and institutional change are derived.

1.5

Project team and time schedule

The project began in the August 1995. It has involved about eighteen person-years of research capacity until November 1999. This project entailed the cooperation of teams from the Center for Energy and Environmental Studies (IVEM of the University of Groningen), the Department of Science, Technology and Society (STS of Utrecht University) and the Department of Household Consumer Studies (HCS of Wageningen Agricultural University). Based on approaches developed at IVEM-RUG and STS-UU and elaborated during an NRP1 project (reduction of CO2 emissions by lifestyle changes), a proposal was submitted, for a further interdisciplinary research project (which required the inclusion of HCSWAU in the project team), to the NRP (second tranche) in an open and peer-reviewed competition process. The project team was co-ordinated by W. Biesiot (IVEM) until January 1997, at which time W. Biesiot left his position due to the recurrence of a severe illness. W. Biesiot passed away in April 1998. H.C. Moll (IVEM) took over the role of project 26

coordinator in the Spring of 1997. K. Blok (STS), J.P. Groot-Marcus (HCS) & S. Nonhebel (IVEM) formed the project staff co-responsible for the development of the project and for the tutoring of the project workers in their respective teams. The main part of the research has been carried out by N.M. Brouwer (HCS), M. van den Berg (STS), K.J. Kramer (IVEM), J. Potting (STS), A.H.M.E. Reinders (STS), D.E. Uitdenbogerd (HCS), K. Vringer (STS) and H.C. Wilting (IVEM). 1.6

Main goal of the report and its structure

The reports main goal is to present the results of the integration phase of the GreenHouse project. In this phase, we reconsider carefully the knowledge obtained in the various case studies, addressing the research questions of the preceding phases. We do this in order to answer the integrative questions: are there effective options available to reduce national GHG emissions through changes in the consumption patterns of households, what amount of GHG emissions can be avoided by implementing these options and what is the feasibility of introducing these changes in households and what are the possibilities of increasing the feasibility and acceptability of the desired changes? When integrating the results we also present and discuss the main observations of the total work done within the project. With respect to the individual work of team members, the end of each chapter of this integration report names the publications constituent to that particular chapter. Chapter 2 discusses the basic methodologies applied and develops the interdisciplinary methodological framework used in the GreenHouse project. The energy analysis discipline and the household analysis discipline are the basic methodologies, which examine households from different perspectives and using different methods. The interdisciplinary methodological framework is developed based on both disciplines, and the project results are obtained through combining knowledge from both disciplines, frequently in an iterative process. For reasons of methodological clarity, we discuss the important project results along disciplinary lines, notwithstanding our interdisciplinary perspective. Figure 1.1 displays the

27

Figure 1.1 Structure of the report (see also text 1.6)

Energy analysis (EA)

Household analysis (HA)

Integration disciplines

of

Chapter 2

Analysis of activities (EA)

Analysis of activities (HA)

Chapter 4

Chapter 3

Design options Chapter 3 and 4

Quantification options Impact at national level

Impact at household level

Chapter 5

Chapter 6 Evaluation of results Chapter 7

Discussion of recommendations Chapter 8

28

Starting point

structure of the report. In Chapter 3, the main findings about household activities are presented, obtained by household analysis. The results of energy analysis of products and services used in household activities are reviewed in Chapter 4. In both chapters, changes (named reduction options) are identified in household practices that may lead to a reduction of the energy requirements of these households. The options found in Chapter 3 imply changes in household practices, while the options found in Chapter 4 include changes in purchases. Of course, a strong interrelation is present in the options discussed in these two chapters. In Chapter 5, the options identified earlier are designed and described in a quantitative way and implemented in an I-O based energy analysis model, calculating the changes in national energy use and GHG emissions. Additional to the options constructed in the context of the GreenHouse project, other energy reducing measures in production and efficiency increases of household appliances are included in the I-O model. In this way, the separate effects of distinguished approaches (technical change, household behavioural change, changes at the production end of the economy) are demonstrated. The overall effect of the implementation of all types of options on the national GHG emissions is also determined. In Chapter 6, the feasibility of option implementation is discussed from a household-study perspective and attention is paid to possibilities and constraints at individual household level. The macro and micro level insights obtained in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 are discussed within a broader context in Chapter 7. In this chapter, international comparison results concerning household energy requirements are evaluated and attention is paid to some potentially important and unconsidered non-CO2 GHG emissions. The results of the GreenHouse project are also compared to results of other such studies aimed at reductions of energy usage via changes made in household consumption and behaviour patterns. The overall integration results are presented and are put under critical review in Chapter 8. In this chapter the concluding recommendations are also given.

29

1.7

Literature referred in chapter 1

Biesiot, W., H.C. Moll, (eds.), (1995) Reduction of CO2 Emissions by Lifestyle Changes, Final Report to the NRP Global Air Pollution and Climate Change. IVEM Research Report No. 80, Groningen: University of Groningen. IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change), (1996) The science of climate change. Climate Change 1995. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. VROM (Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment), (1998) National Environmental Policy Plan. The Hague: Ministry of VROM (Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment). VROM (Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment), (1999) Uitvoeringsnota Klimaatbeleid (White paper on Climate Policy). The Hague: Ministry of VROM (Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment). UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), (1997) The Kyoto protocol: http://www.undfccc.de.htm Vringer, K., K. Blok, (1995) The direct and indirect energy requirement of households in the Netherlands. Energy policy, Vol. 23, No.10, pp. 893-910. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W., Moll, H.C. (1995). EAP: Energie Analyse Programma. Handleiding versie 2, IVEM Research Report No. 76, Groningen: University of Groningen.

30

2.

AN

INTERDISCIPLINARY

PERSPECTIVE

TO

ASSESS

AND

EVALUATE REDUCTION OPTIONS ON THE HOUSEHOLD LEVEL

2.1

Introduction

When evaluating the possible changes in household consumption patterns and their impacts on the national GHG emissions, a description of the present situation is a necessary starting point. This description should give insights about present household practices and GHG emissions related to these practices. Such a description should form a solid base for the assessment of consumer’s potential to change their consumption patterns in a way that results in a reduction of GHG emissions. Research from different perspectives is required in order to obtain a useful description of present household practices and related GHG emissions. Detailed analyses on product levels - the energy requirements and GHG emissions attributed to various food, products and cloths, must be related to theoretical and empirical knowledge on household practices - how do households use their cooking appliances and their washing machine? The household perspective is also a central point in the construction of reduction options. Alongside the effects connected to energy requirements and GHG emissions, the consequences of various options should be determined at considered activity category level and at household level. Relevant effects of the options under study are those requiring scarce household resources or affecting the general standard of living. Therefore, the integration of two disciplines is required, those of energy analysis and household analysis. The interdisciplinary methodological approach opted for involves the methodology of energy analysis and household analysis being separately characterising first, followed by a description of the integration framework of both disciplines used in the GreenHouse project (see source 2.1).

2.2

Energy analysis

The methodology of energy life cycle analysis was established in the nineteenseventies and is also referred to as energy analysis. Generally speaking, energy life cycle analysis of a product follows a three-step procedure: 31

-

System description to identify all relevant processes in the life cycle of a product;

-

System quantification to establish the quantitative relationships describing the various processes and the interactions between processes;

-

System evaluation by the calculations of the energy consumption in each process within the life cycle and of the total of energy required for the complete life cycle of a product.

Figure 2.1 offers a schematic representation of the product life cycle (the general result of the first step). The outcome of step three is the quantity called the cumulative energy requirement of the product.

Figure 2.1 Schematic description of the life cycle of a product (source 2.1).

RESOURCE EXTRACTION

MATERIAL PRODUCTION

PRODUCT MANUFACTURING

RETAIL TRADE

PRODUCT USE

WASTE

The cumulative energy requirement consist of various components: -

Energy fed directly into the processes part of the main chain of the product life cycle.

-

Primary energy needed to produce the energy for the main chain.

-

Energy needed to produce additives and other materials and services needed to produce and handle the product.

32

-

Energy needed to produce capital goods for production and handling of the product.

In general, the cumulative energy requirement is quantified per physical unit of product (expressed, e.g., in MJ/unit or MJ/kg). An alternative is to quantify it per unit of financial expenditure (expressed in MJ/ƒ). The latter quantity is called the energy intensity of the product. In many cases, one observes that the product life cycle is not a linear chain. When one attempts to go back up the chain, branching occurs, even if only one single product has to be supplied to households. Production may require various components that each contain different basic materials and additives. Production of these materials requires various resources. An important problem in energy life cycle analysis is defining the boundaries of the system that should be included in the analysis.

In principle, the method for energy life cycle analysis is relatively straightforward, but the determination of a product’s cumulative energy requirement is a rather laborious task as many processes are generally involved in the production of one single product. Each process within the chosen system’s boundaries must be analysed on its relationships between input, output and energy consumption. In the Lifestyle project a hybrid method is applied to avoid the vast amount of work referred to in the previous paragraph. This method entails energy requirements of the most important processes in a product’s life cycle (from a cumulative energy requirement perspective) being analysed using relatively exact method of process analysis. The energy used in the other, less important, parts of the product’s life cycle are estimated using input-output energy analysis. In input-output energy analysis, the relationship between the various components of the product’s life cycle are not established on a physical basis, but on a financial one, using the prices and the energy intensity data of the economic sectors concerned. Although this is less accurate, it is useful as an estimate of the energy requirements for the remaining parts of the product’s life cycle. In the GreenHouse project, we extended the hybrid method for energy life cycle analysis with the emission of greenhouse gases (see source 2.2).

33

2.3

Household analysis

The household analysis discipline focuses on the description and explanation of the household operation and of the behaviour of household members within that household (see source 2.1 for a further description). This research includes examining household processes and decision-making concerning purchase, use and discard of consumption goods. Several factors play a role in the decisions, planning and organisation of consumption within the household. Individuals have physiological needs, demands for shelter and safety, and require conditions for mental necessities such as self-actualisation. Each household group forms ideas concerning their (intermediate) goals and standard of living. These goals are the result of individual and social requirements, norms and values. The standard of living functions here as a guiding principle; it embodies concepts with regard to the way in which households wish to be kept and the extent to which they need various goods and services to satisfy their day-to-day needs. Generally, a household’s standard of living depends on household related factors and on social and cultural norms within the society. A household attempts to reach its standard by carrying out various activities with the utilisation of household resources. Figure 2.2 illustrates the relationships between these factors. The ultimate result of household activities is called the level of living. There is feedback from the level of living to the standard of living. When households are satisfied, everything will more or less remain the same. If the distance between level of living and standard of living is too large, adjustments shall take place to raise the level of living or lower the standard. It is also possible that households receive an increase in household resources, for example, a salary rise or acquisition of knowledge. This shall make it easier to reach the desired level of living. In that case, households can raise their standards. The standard of living and the availability of resources do not only differ between households, but also within the same household at different life phases of the household group: young couples without children, couples with young children, couples with older children, older couples without children at home. Household resources are divided into human and material resources. Human resources are time, psychomotor skills, knowledge and labour capacity that members can and

34

Figure 2.2 Household, resources, goals and activities (source 2.1)

HOUSEHOLD RESOURCES TIME MONEY SPACE KNOWLEDGE SKILLS LABOUR CAPACITY GOODS FACILITIES

HOUSEHOLD GROUP ACQUISITION

TREATMENT MAINTAINING

STORAGE

STANDARD OF LIVING

LEVEL OF LIVING

USE

DISPOSAL

WASTE

wish to invest in the household. The availability of human resources depends to a large degree on the composition and the life phase of the household group. Besides human resources, every household can use material resources when available, such as natural and (previously acquired) processed goods, facilities, space and money to purchase goods and services on the market. Some of these resources are interchangeable, for example time and money, and this is called monetisation. To some extent they are complementary - instead of buying a cake, one can invest time into the activity of actually baking the cake for themselves and vice versa. This is especially important for households where either time or money are scarce, for instance in double income households or in households living on government benefit respectively. Resources are influenced by the environment and different sectors in society. Socio-economic factors determine availability of labour, money and time and accessible information and education determine knowledge and skills. Space, goods and facilities depend on the market, the infrastructure and the institutions in the nonprofit sector. According to the household analysis approach, the household’s foremost

35

purpose is not to acquire goods and services, but the provision of these utilities for household production and consumption, the latter directly contributing to a certain level of living being achieved. Household production and consumption focuses on the realisation of household activities. Household activities are divided into four activity categories: housing, feeding, clothing and personal care. -

The first activity category, housing, encompasses all activities concerned with the house’s maintenance and proximate environment, arranging facilities for indoor climate, communication, maintenance of furniture and rooms.

-

The feeding activity category concerns all activities involved in arranging the consumption of food, including the purchase and maintenance of stoves, cooking utensils and crockery, acquisition and storage of food and waste management.

-

The clothing activity category includes the activities concerning textiles, the decisions to purchase certain textiles and products required for the maintenance of clothes. In this research project the maintenance of non-individual textiles (such as towels) are also included within this category.

-

Personal care activities refer to all activities concerning sanitation of the persons themselves or dependent persons like children or elderly.

An activity category consists of various activities related to each other by the use and transformation of products. Most activities require the use of more than one product. In each activity category, the life cycles of several products cross each other. For instance clothing, where not only the kind and quantity of textiles is important, but also the washing machine, dryer and detergents, as well as the frequency washing occurs.

2.4

Integration of the energy analysis and the household analysis

This project combines the two types of analysis in order to evaluate the household energy requirement related to household activities and to assess the potential for household behavioural changes resulting in the reduction of GHG emissions. The cross-section between both types of analysis lies in the products or services acquired

36

by households, as demonstrated in Figure 2.3. Products are part of the product life cycle chain on the one hand and part of a household activity on the other.

Figure 2.3 Relationship between product energy life cycle analysis and household activities (source: 2.1).

R. E.

R. E.

M. P.

M. P.

P. M.

P. M.

R. T.

R. T.

HOUSEHOLD RESOURCES

PERSONAL CARE CLOTHING HOUSING FEEDING

LEVEL OF LIVING

STANDARD OF LIVING

W

W

The products, which enter the household activity system, embody a certain amount of energy. Each of these products has it’s own unique life cycle. By analysing this life cycle, the cumulative energy requirement of the product is determined. The sum of the cumulative energy requirements and the energy requirements for the direct energy consumption of all individual products belonging to an activity is the total cumulative energy requirement for that activity. The same applies to greenhouse gas emissions. For example, in the clothing category the activity of washing involves indirect energy in the form of washing machine, the washing powder and the clothes, whereas the

37

direct energy concerns the electricity required to run that machine. The total energy requirement of washing is the addition of both. The central question, ‘to what extent can GHG emissions be reduced by changes in household consumption patterns?’ is studied per activity category. This is done to prevent burden shifting. Changes in household consumption within an activity category are likely to have consequences for use of other products or consumption of direct energy. Applying such an integrated assessment determines the associated changes in total cumulative energy requirement for that activity category.

2.5

Conclusion

The integrated approach allows one to obtain an insight into the potential of options aimed at achieving reductions in GHG emissions and simultaneously offers knowledge about the opportunities, constraints and limitations of adopting these options in the household. The large variety of household consumption patterns requires an in-depth analytical approach in order to assess the reduction potential as well as the acceptance level of specified options implemented at the individual household level.

2.6

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 2.1 Groot-Marcus, A.P., J. Potting, N.M. Brouwer and K. Blok, (1996) Households, energy consumption and emission of greenhouse gases. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies.

Source 2.2 Wilting, H.C., R.M.J. Benders, W. Biesiot, M. Louwers and H.C. Moll, (1999) EAP, Energy Analysis Program: Manual Version 3.0. IVEM Research Report, No. 98. Groningen: Centre for Energy and Environmental Studies, University of Groningen.

38

3.

HOUSEHOLD PRACTICES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES FOR ENERGY REQUIREMENTS

3.1

Introduction

The results of the Lifestyle project showed that large differences existed between households in their energy requirements. The household model presented in Chapter 2 is used as guide for a search to the causes underlying these differences. Households differ in their resources and their standards of living. These differences lead to differences in household practices, which in turn result in different energy requirements. To understand these differences in energy requirements between households, household practices and their variation required detailed study. (Why has household A lower energy requirements than household B, while households appear the same?) This is achieved by examining the use of products and activities in relation to resource availability and the level of living of that particular household. Further product use and activities are evaluated in relation to other activities in the particular activity category involved, since these activities are strongly intertwined (more washing implies also more drying). For the clothing and feeding activity categories actual household practices were studied and energy reducing options were evaluated in these practices. In these categories, large changes have been observed over the last few decades (introduction of the automatic washing machine, freezer and dryer), which show that changes are possible. Furthermore, direct and indirect energy use is strongly interrelated (the menu determines the cooking time). The feeding and clothing categories include nearly 25% of the total energy requirements of Dutch households. The information was obtained through a review of available literature combined with a large survey among Dutch households. The survey results are contained in source 3.1. The main purpose of the survey was to determine the relationship between activities concerning energy requirements and to determine the existing variation within in these activities. All practices were examined in relation to their function in the activity category. Practices concerning drying laundry alone (line drying versus dryer) were evaluated, but also the practices in relation to the total amount of household laundry

39

and the specification of the washing machine (spinning capacity), the available space for drying and so forth. The household practices were investigated by means of interviews using a quantitative questionnaire including open questions. The interviews were held among 104 households with children. This type of households was chosen since it is expected that they have developed strategies to cope with scarcities of time and money. In order to prevent socially desired answers, this survey was presented as a study of household practices in general. The survey’s set up and the statistical analysis of its results are reported in source 3.1. This chapter discusses the most important results with respect to household practices and energy use.

3.2

The activity category of feeding

In the activity of feeding, the sequence of acquisition, storing, preparation, moment of consumption, dining out and finally washing up the dishes are recognised. Energy requirements were determined for all these activities as well as the indirect energy stored in the ingredients of the meals. This was achieved by combining knowledge from household studies with data from energy analysis. The results are shown in table 3.1. Large differences in energy requirement of these activities exist. It is clear that products (the actual food) account for more than 60 % of the total energy requirements of this activity category and that within this category vegetables and meat represent the largest shares. Energy requirements for storage, treatment and disposal are at a magnitude of 10 % and acquisition accounts for about 3 %. The main cause of energy use was determined for all of these activities. Furthermore, possible changes that may lead to a reduced energy use within this category were also determined. These changes could include technical changes (more energy-efficient appliances) or behavioural changes (washing dishes by hand). Finally, the implications of these changes in household practices were determined. These analyses are reported in source 3.1. The results are summarised below.

40

Table 3.1 Energy requirements for various activities within the feeding activity category. Expressed as percentage of the total energy required in this category (48 GJ/hh/y) (source 3.1).

Activity

% of the total

Acquisition

2.7

Storing

13.2

Treatment

Sub-activity

% of the total

Cooling

5.4

Freezing

7.0

Equipment

0.8

Cooking equipment

6.6

Small kitchen appliances

2.2

Kitchen equipment

0.8

Dishwashing

5.4

Packages

5.5

9.6

Products

63.6

Disposal

10.9

3.2.1 Acquisition Energy used in this activity is mainly related to the use of a car for shopping. Reduction can be obtained by reduced car use when shopping, for instance, by lowering the frequency of trips, by using other means of transport like a bike or by availing of a delivery service.

3.2.2 Storage More than half of the energy requirements for storage are required for freezing. This can be reduced by use of a smaller freezer or by discontinuing its use. Another option is to move the freezer to a cooler place (the cellar), since this reduces the energy requirements of freezing. However, only 10 % of Dutch houses have a cellar. There was a strong correlation between acquisition and storage practices - households that keep abundant frozen stocks have a lower shopping frequency but they use their car more often.

41

3.2.3 Products The required energy for the production of food items implies the largest part of total energy required for food. This is evaluated in Chapter 4.

3.2.4 Degree of processing There is a growing consumption of ready-to-eat meals. The consequences of this change were investigated. It was found that the energy requirement for pre-processed food products is generally higher than for the same food products prepared at home. The extra energy used in industry for preparing and storing these meals cannot be compensated by energy reductions through shorter preparation times in households (source 3.2).

3.2.5 Treatment For preparation of meals, households will always require cooking equipment. The energy requirements for cooking can be influenced by behaviour during cooking, but research showed that the effects are very small (source 3.2). Different energy sources for cooking (gas or electric) do have a large effect. A shift from electric to gas would reduce energy required for cooking by over 30%. Some energy reduction can be obtained through reduced use of small kitchen appliances. The gain, however, is small since the most frequently used appliances such as coffee-machines and water boilers concern processes that require energy anyhow.

3.2.6 Use The energy required to prepare a one-person meal is larger than that for a four-person meal (per person). Eating together is an option for reducing energy use (source 3.2). However, there is a growing tendency within households to eat apart (due to work, sports and hobby). The survey (source 3.1) found that, on average, that two times per week a household member eats at another, later time and often the microwave is used to re-heat the meal.

3.2.7 Disposal The energy requirements of disposal mainly concern the amount of warm water used for rinsing and washing of the dishes. The use of a washing machine requires more 42

energy than washing by hand. Over 40 % of the households participating in the survey possess a dishwasher. So not using a washing machine is an option. Another option is not using warm water for rinsing, since about 50 % of the households rinse their dishes with warm water (source 3.1).

3.2.8 Packaging Packaging accounts for 5 % of the energy requirements. For most food products, it is unrealistic to remove packages; it is only possible to use the least energy intensive packaging. Reduction is therefore limited (source 3.2).

3.2.9 More efficient appliances The previously mentioned changes all include changes in household behaviour. Besides these more energy efficient appliances may also result in a reduction of energy used (source 3.2).

3.2.10

Possible changes within activity category feeding

The analysis described above led to the following possible changes within household practices that may lead to a reduction of household energy use: Transport Use of bicycle Delivery system Storage Reduction Size of stock Use of Cellar Smaller freezer/fridge More efficient freezer/fridge

3.3

Treatment Reduction use microwave Use of gas stoves Less use of small kitchen appliances Dish washing More efficient machine Rinsing with cold water

The activity category of clothing

In the clothing activity category the indirect energy use of clothing is taken into account, but also the direct energy use for washing and drying textiles. Within the clothing category the following activities are recognised: gathering laundry, sorting, turning clothes inside out, checking pockets, stain treatment and filling the washing machine and the washing itself: hand wash, machine wash, 43

loading, temperature and programme choice, drying of the laundry, including the place for line drying, tumble dryer use and resorting for tumble dryer use, ironing and repairing. As was done in the feeding category; the energy use of the various activities was determined on basis of literature reviewed. Literature study showed that large differences exist in energy requirements of these activities (table 3.2). As was the case for food, the product here, the clothes themselves, account for a large share in the energy requirements of this activity category. They will be discussed in Chapter 4. The major energy requirements within the clothing category concern the use of the washing machine and the dryer. The other activities require time (sorting out) and are of interest when other household resources are taken into account. The indirect energy for washing denotes the energy for the production of the washing machine. Table 3.2 Direct and indirect energy requirements for various activities within the clothing activity category. Expressed as percentage of the total energy required in this category (11 GJ/hh/y) (source 3.1).

Activity

Direct

Indirect 46

Textiles Washing

17

1

Drying

20

1

Ironing

3

Water and detergents

11

The household practices concerning washing and drying were given detailed study in the survey. The major determinants for energy use within these activities were obtained. Possible changes within households practices that may lead to a reduction of energy use were defined and the impact of these changes on energy requirements in other activities analysed. The results are summarised below (main source 3.1).

3.3.1 Washing The energy required for washing is strongly determined by the washing frequency and the temperature used. The frequency can be affected via two routes: higher loading of the machine or through a decrease in the total amount of laundry. The present mean

44

load is 3.5 kg whereas the loading capacity of the machines is 5 kg. Based on these values some improvement can be expected from higher loading practices. However, a detailed study on loading practices showed that only cotton and linen cycles can be loaded up to 5 kg, synthetics and wool only to 2.5 kg and 1.0 kg respectively (source 3.1). The combination of the foregoing with information pertaining to the occurrence of materials in the wash illustrates that the average load is only 3.7 kg. Not much reduction can be expected here. The survey posed the question if higher loading was possible. The results show that households assume that higher loading leads to reduced washing results (not as clean) or that it may damage the washing machine.

The major determinant in the amount of laundry turned out to be the number of days an item is worn. It was calculated that wearing clothes one day longer reduces washing-energy by 25 %. The factors affecting number of days cloths are worn were analysed. It was found that number of wearing days varied from 1 to 7 days, depending on the type of clothing involved. Households also differ in their standards some wash every day while others only when clothing are dirty or smelly. A striking result from the survey was the discovery of a correlation between the number of articles worn per day and the number of days cloths are worn, therefore with less laundry. The explanation for this phenomenon was seen to be wearing an undershirt.

The energy required for washing is mainly used for heating the water in the washing machine. Washing at lower temperatures will reduce energy use. The average washing temperature is 50 oC. In the last decades average temperatures of washing have decreased. Lower temperatures are possible thanks to improved quality of washing detergents, among others by the addition of enzymes. Lower washing temperatures only lead to a reduction of energy used when the indirect energy of the washing powder does not increase. The survey found an interrelation: households that sort laundry into various loadtypes, do have a higher frequency of washing but wash at lower temperatures, than households with other sorting practices.

45

3.3.2 Drying Drying cotton requires twice as much energy as the washing it. This implies that using a dryer is a more important determinant of energy used in this activity category than the use of the washing machine. In practice all laundry is washed in the machine, whereas only a part of the laundry is tumble dried for various reasons. The survey showed that all households apply line-drying, even those with a dryer. The most important option for reducing the energy required by drying is the application of line drying. The energy reduction that can be obtained is estimated to be 91 % of the energy needed to tumble dry (since indoor line-drying leads to an increase in heating requirements a 100% reduction is not obtained (source 3.3). The reasons for using a tumble dryer were evaluated. One frequent mentioned reason is not having enough space for drying. It was also shown that dryers are especially used for small laundry items (socks and underwear), since it saves a lot of time hanging up these items. Households in the survey that possess a dryer do have more laundry, than households without. The energy required for drying is related to the amount of water in the laundry. In principle, spinning at higher speed can reduce this amount significantly. A higher spin capacity of the washing machine reduces energy used in the drying process.

3.3.3 Technological changes Finally, the technological changes that may lead to a reduction of energy use were determined. They include more energy efficient washing machines and dryers, but also machines using other energy carriers (such as gas-fired dryers and hot-fill washing machines). Since production of washing machines also requires energy, the lifetime extenuation of the equipment was also investigated (source 3.3).

3.3.4 Possible changes within activity category clothing The household analysis concerning the clothing category led to the following possible changes within household practices that may lead to a reduction of energy used in households:

46

Washing Lower temperatures Higher average load Smaller washing machine More efficient washing machine Hot-fill machine Energy saving button Washing less frequent

Drying Line drying Gas fired dryer Most efficient dryer Higher average load Better spin-drying Extra space for line drying Use of appliances Share use of appliance by four households Lifetime extension

3.4

Concluding remarks

The results from the survey show that households have a large variety of practices and that these practices influence one another. To study possible changes within households it is important to evaluate all activities within an activity category, instead of merely one. To give an example, when the sequence acquisition, storage, preparation and disposal are evaluated for two extreme households, options for reducing energy used differ. The first household is one with a vegetable garden, which implies that they grow their own vegetables. Their shopping frequency is low and they possess a freezer (to store the vegetables over winter). The other is a household that eats pre-prepared meals. They purchase them every day from the shop (after work), use a microwave to heat them and have no dishwasher since there are no dishes and since meals are collected every day, no freezer is required. Based on the options mentioned earlier, the major energy requirement in the first household is the freezer; however giving it up implies a complete change in lifestyle, since growing your own vegetables is hardly possible without a freezer. When energy requirements of households are determined by having a freezer and a dishwasher, the second household seems energy efficient. However, the energy requirements of pre-prepared meals outweigh all other requirements. The first household seems inefficient, but since they grow their own vegetables the energy required for the ingredients of their meals is very low, which compensates for the higher costs for freezing. In the clothing category, a comparable example is possible. The first household has a lot of laundry since it only wears clothes for one day. Since clothing is not dirty washing can be done at low temperatures, but due to the consequently large amounts 47

of laundry, line drying is not possible (not enough space) and all laundry is tumble dried. The second household only wash when clothing is dirty, however higher temperatures are required to get them clean again. The low frequency implies a small amount of laundry and line drying is now possible. Focussing on low washing temperatures would imply that household one seems energy efficient, whereas higher frequencies and the use of a dryer outweigh all savings in comparison to lower temperatures. The previous examples show that studying all practices within an activity category is essential in determining possible energy saving options within a household. Focussing on just one activity within a category may even lead to opposite effects than those intended. Furthermore, the importance of the relationship between products and practices is illustrated; therefore, in the following chapter the indirect energy of the products used in the households is evaluated.

3.5

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 3.1 Uitdenbogerd, D.E., N.M. Brouwer and J.P. Groot-Marcus. (1998) Domestic energy saving

potentials

for

food

and

textiles:

an

empirical

study.

H&C

onderzoeksrapport 2. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies.

Source 3.2 Brouwer, N.M. (1998) Energy reduction options for food consumption in Dutch households. H&C Working paper, No. 9801. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies.

Source 3.3 Uitdenbogerd, D.E. and K. Vringer. (1999) Energy reduction options for the domestic maintenance of textiles. H&C Working paper 9902. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies.

48

4.

ENERGY

REQUIREMENTS

OF

PRODUCTS

AND

SERVICES

PURCHASED BY THE HOUSEHOLDS

4.1

Introduction

In the activity categories of feeding and clothing, a large part of the total energy requirements of activities is related to energy requirements of products used within these activities (Chapter 3). Furthermore, strong interaction exists between the energy requirements of products and energy required using the products (using a microwave to heat a pre-prepared meal). This implies that the energy requirement of the products is a vital factor in the total energy requirements of the households. Therefore, in this project much effort was made to determine the energy requirements of products used in the households. The previous project (Lifestyle) developed a methodology to determine energy requirements of products (see Chapter 2, Energy Analysis). This methodology is labour-intensive so not from all products used in households energy requirements can be determined in this way. Therefore, a selection was made. In first instance, products used in the feeding and clothing activity categories were analysed, due to their strong interaction with household practices. Attention was also paid to products from other categories: flowers (because this is the most energy intensive (MJ/gld) product available) and holidays/leisure time because 20 % of household energy use is related to this category and large changes within this category have been observed in recent decades.

4.2

Food products

Several studies on energy use and related CO2 emissions in the food production system have been carried out in recent decades. The results of these studies were used in the Lifestyle project. The GreenHouse project expands on this information. Therefore, with respect to feeding, new figures for energy, requirements were not determined (since this was done in previous studies), but the emissions of the other greenhouse gasses are studied. This is carried out since the agricultural sector is an important source of CH4 and N2O emissions. CH4 is emitted from cattle farming and 49

N2O originates from denitrification and fertiliser production. The radiative effect of these gases is much higher than that of CO2. In the first instance, a study was done to the emissions of CO2, N2O and CH4 that occurred during cultivation of the most important agricultural crops (source 4.1). By applying the life cycle approach, the CO2, N2O and CH4 emissions related to agricultural food production were determined for the 11 most important agricultural crops. This implies that for all inputs: planting material, fertilisers, pesticides etc. and cultivation measures: ploughing, sowing/planting, weeding, applying fertilisers and pesticides and harvesting the emissions of the three greenhouse gases were determined. For a detailed description on how emissions of all inputs for all crops were determined see source 4.1. In table 4.1, results for various crops are summarised. Large differences in emissions between agricultural crops were observed. The cultivation of sugar beet requires only 0.04 kg CO2 equiv./kg product while for the production of 1 kg of wheat or 1 kg of potatoes 0.3 and 0.14 kg CO2 equiv. is required. For most crops, the N2O emission turned out to be the major contribution to the total emissions the CO2 equivalents. The emissions of CO2 are caused by the used of fossil fuels as well as by the production of agricultural inputs. The emissions of N2O originate from the production and application of synthetic fertiliser. The change to other fertilisers may be an option in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The results obtained in this study imply that changes in food consumption patterns (change from French beans to cabbage for instance) can effect greenhouse gas emissions. Table 4.1 Contributions (in %) of the separate greenhouse gases to the total CO2-equivalents emissions per kg agricultural crop (source 4.1).

Crop

CO2 emission

N2O emission

CH4 emission

in %

in %

in %

Winter wheat

38.6

60.9

0.5

0.399

Winter barley

43.9

55.2

0.9

0.326

Potatoes

61.2

38.1

0.7

0.147

Sugar beets

46.6

51.8

1.2

0.041

French beans

47.4

52.0

0.6

0.171

Spinach

86.3

11.8

1.9

0.198

Cabbages

81.6

16.8

1.6

0.094

50

Kg CO2-eq./kg

The large impact of the non- CO2 greenhouse gas emissions (impact of N2O is far greater than that of CO2) that were observed for in agricultural production demonstrated the importance of analysing the non- CO2 GHG emissions in the rest of the production chain. Therefore, another study was done in which the GHG emissions related to food products were evaluated (source 4.2). The energy analysis method (see Chapter 2) was elaborated with the other greenhouse gases to calculate the greenhouse gas intensities. This implies that the greenhouse gas emissions were determined for all steps within the life cycle of the products. This was done for 125 food products. These food products include products as wholemeal bread, white bread, cakes, potatoes, vegetables, nuts, jams and marmalades etc. and cover the ‘average’ Dutch consumption pattern. The results of these 125 products cannot be discussed individually in the context of this report and results are therefore clustered. For detailed discussion on the individual products, see source 4.2 and 4.3. It is firstly analysed what way different stages of the lifecycle contribute to the total energy requirements and GHG-emission of a food product. In table 4.2 the average results of the 125 food products are given. Table 4.2 Relative contributions of various life cycle stages to the total energy use and GHG emissions related to Dutch food consumption (source 4.3).

Stage in lifecycle

Energy use (%) CO2 equiv. (%)

Agriculture

27

39

Industry

22

17

Packaging

5

5

Transport

7

6

Trade

12

10

Consumption

28

23

Waste

-0.5

-0.5

Table 4.2 shows that the consumption stage in the lifecycle of food products contributes the largest share to the total energy needed for food consumption. The consumption phase is the phase where the lifecycle of the products enters the household analysis. It appears that nearly 30 % of the energy related to the production of food is used in the households. This is in accordance with the data mentioned in Chapter 3 where it is shown that indirect energy of food products is about 65 % of the 51

energy used in the activity category feeding. The consumption phase accounts for the remaining 35%. In principle, values (30-35) should be the same but given the inconsistencies in data and the large varieties observed, this is an acceptable agreement. Further analysis showed that in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, agriculture production is the largest contributor to the total greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption. More than 80% of the CH4 and N2O emissions emitted in the total lifecycle of food products concern emissions in the agricultural production sector (source 4.2).

Through the combination of individual products’ greenhouse gas intensities with the information on household expenditures (budget studies), it is possible to determine the GHG emissions related to the annual food consumption. Figure 4.1 presents the expenditures of the households over seven food categories alongside the related CO2, N2O and CH4 emissions. The CO2 emission pattern closely resembles the household expenditure pattern. For example, in 1990, households spent on average more than 45% of their expenditures on food product categories ‘beverages and products containing sugar’ and ‘meat, meat products and fish’. The contribution of these two food product categories to the total energy use and CO2 emissions from the household food consumption is in the same order of magnitude 43%. Emission patterns of CH4 and N2O differ strongly from the distribution of the expenditures. Products originating from cattle husbandry (milk and meat) determine over 85% of the CH4 emissions related to food consumption, while they account for only 45% of the expenditures, whereas the categories bread, potatoes and sugar account for over 55% of the total N2O emissions. When expressed in CO2 equivalents it turned out that the non- CO2 GHG emissions account for 25% of the total emission related to Dutch food production.

It should be realised that the food products analysed are average products. Large differences exist within the product leading to different energy requirements. To give an indication of this variation, results from a study on the energy requirements of

52

Figure 4.1 Distribution of Dutch annual spending over seven food product categories. Contribution of the various food product categories to CO2, CH4, N2O emissions and the total greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch household food consumption (source: 4.2).

expenditures

oil 4%

energy/CO2

bread 17%

dairy 16%

oil 4%

potatoes 16% beverages 22%

meat 23%

others 2%

CH4

bread 17%

dairy 18%

beverages 17%

potatoes 13% meat 28%

others 3%

N 2O bread 2% beverages 2%

dairy 46%

bread 20%

dairy 33% meat 40%

beverages 16%

oil 1% oil 1%

potatoes 19%

potatoes 9% others 0%

others 5%

meat 6%

CO2 equi

bread 15%

dairy 25%

beverages 14%

oil 3% potatoes 13%

others 3%

meat 27%

53

different types of French beans are presented here (source 4.3). The study concerns energy requirements of fresh beans grown in The Netherlands, fresh beans imported from Africa and three types of conserved beans: those in a jar, canned and frozen beans. Results show that the energy requirement of the imported beans is nearly 7 times that of the beans grown in The Netherlands (figure 4.2). The energy required for transportation is the main cause for this difference.

Figure 4.2 Energy requirements of different appearances of French beans: fresh, grown in the Netherlands, fresh, imported from Africa, and three conserved versions: canned, those in a jar and frozen beans (source 4.3).

Energy requirements French beans MJ/kg

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0 Fresh NL

Fresh Afr

Canned

Jar

Frozen

Several means towards reducing GHG emissions related to food consumption can be recognised based on the knowledge obtained in the studies mentioned above: consumption of locally produced food, less meat consumption, substitution of meat by other protein containing food products such as eggs, nuts and pulses. Substitution of meat by cheese is not a reduction option since change from the meat category to the dairy category products does not lead to reduction of the related emissions. Another option is the substitution of glasshouse products by products grown in open ground.

54

4.3

Clothes

Chapter 3 shows that a large part (over 40%) of energy related to the clothing activity represents the indirect energy of the clothes. Therefore, the energy requirements of clothing were analysed in further detail (source 4.4). Clothing makes up an important part of the demand on household resources. An average Dutch household spends 2500 Dfl/year (6% of the annual budget) and 7 hours per week on clothing purchases and maintenance. Households purchase about 15 kg of textiles annually of which 70% is made from cotton; the remainder consists of synthetics and wool (table 4.3). Due to losses in the production chain, 18 kg of textile fibres has to be produced for the production of 15 kg of household textiles. In table 4.3, the energy requirements for the production of various types of fibres is also given: the natural materials wool and cotton display the lowest energy requirements, whereas the energy requirements of the synthetic fibres is nearly 3 times as high as energy requirements of wool and cotton. The energy in the fibre production is small (23%) in comparison with the energy requirements in the rest of the chain: spinning, knitting, textile finishing, confectioning, transport, wholesale and retail (table 4.4). The energy requirements in rest of the chain (from spinning to retail) are independent of the fibre type. This implies that choice of materials has only a small effect on the total energy requirements of the textiles. Furthermore, it is shown that the major part of the fibres used concerns cotton, with a relatively low energy requirement. A shift to other fibres will imply an increase in energy use.

The choice of the clothing materials does have an effect on the maintenance practices within the households. The washing of synthetic fibres requires more energy since maximum load for synthetics is lower (Chapter 3.3.1). The drying, however, requires less energy. Moreover, clothing of synthetic fibres is generally lighter, so less kilos of textile are used per item. The interaction of all factors is evaluated in source 4.5. It is illustrated that they counterbalance one another so that choice of materials does not affect direct energy requirements for washing and drying in the households.

55

Table 4.3 The energy requirements for the production of the most frequently used fibres and the quantity purchased per household (source 4.4).

Material

Kg / household / year

Energy requirement (MJ/kg fibres)

Cotton

12.7

50

Polyacryl

0.43

136

Polyamide

1.04

130

Polyester

2.37

93

Viscose

0.89

151

Wool

1.21

16

Table 4.4 Energy requirements in different stages of the lifecycle of clothes expressed in percentage of the total (source 4.4)

Stage of life cycle

% Energy req.

Retail trade

45

Wholesale trade

1

Transport

4

Confectioning

7

Textile finishing

14

Knitting

4

Spinning

4

Fibre production

23

Choice of material effects household practices but the net effect on the energy requirements of these changes is zero. Furthermore, of the materials used most (cotton and wool) have the lowest energy requirements. This implies that with respect to clothing only changes that include the purchase of less clothing reduce energy requirements of households in that category. Some existing options are lifetime extension of clothing through better quality clothing or fashion-flexible clothing design or less frequent washing.

56

4.4

Flowers

The Lifestyle project showed that the energy intensity of cut flowers and indoor plants (15 MJ/gld) is one of the highest of all consumer products. In the Netherlands cut flowers are used as household decorations and play an important role as gifts. Their function as decoration and/or gift means that one would expected less energy intensive products could replace them rather easily. Therefore, a detailed study (source 4.6) was done on the energy requirements of cut flowers. The major contributors to the energy requirements and their variation were determined. Finally, the energy requirements of other potential gifts were determined to assess the energy reductions obtainable when flowers purchased as gift were replaced by other presents. The energy requirement of 37 most common flowers grown in the Netherlands was determined with hybrid energy analysis, as previously described in Chapter 2. An enormous variation in energy requirements per flower was found; varying from 2 MJ/flower (monkshood) to nearly 200 MJ/flower (flamingo flower). The main cause for the high-energy requirements of cut flowers turned out to be heating greenhouses. Flowers grown outdoors showed far lower energy requirements than those grown in greenhouses. The heating requirements differ per season (higher in winter) and therefore attention was also given to energy requirements of these cut flowers when grown in different seasons of the year. Figure 4.3 offers an overview of the primary energy required for the six highest retailing flowers in the Netherlands. Once again, a large variation is observed: a carnation bought in January requires 5 times as much energy as the same flower bought in June. The variation found implies that energy requirements of a bouquet of flowers depends on the type of flower in the bouquet and the time of the year in which it is purchased.

57

Figure 4.3 Energy required for the production of the six most sold flowers in the Netherlands in different months of the year (source 4.6).

60 Chrysanthemum Carnation Freesia Rose Tulip Transvaal daisy

Energy required (MJ/each)

50

40

30

20

10

0 Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Month

Following this, a number of energy reduction options related to flowers were analysed, which can be implemented nowadays by households themselves. For each option, the total number of functional units (one gift or one decoration item, in most cases one bouquet of flowers) was kept the same as much as possible. The options analysed include: purchase of less flowers in the winter period, purchase of flowers with lower energy requirements, purchase of flowering plants instead of cut flowers and alternative present selection. Since 50% of flowers are used for decoration of the house and the other 50% as presents, distinction is made between these two purposes. This implies that when all flowers used for decoration are replaced by something else (paintings etc.) a reduction of 50% is obtained (since gift flowers remain).

4.5

Leisure time

An average Dutch household spends almost 30% of its time and 20% of the household budget on leisure. Leisure activities take up almost 20% of the total household energy consumption. The category leisure can be divided in indoor activities, outdoor

58

activities and holidays. From these, holidays have the largest energy intensity per hour. Therefore, attention is paid to the energy requirements of holidays, the existing variation in it and the main causes for the observed variation. This study is reported in source 4.7. In first place, the present holiday ‘practices’ were evaluated. It was shown that a large variation existed in holidays with respect to destination, means of transport, duration and accommodation. Therefore, energy requirements of an ‘average’ holiday are of limited interest. So 9 holiday packages were designed with each package representing a large group of Dutch holiday-goers during their long summer. The packages designed and their characteristics are mentioned in table 4.5 accompanied by an indication of the percentage of Dutch households reflected in each package. The packages vary from a one-week break in a bungalow somewhere in the Netherlands to a fortnight in Indonesia in a hotel and three weeks in a tent on the Mediterranean. The energy requirements were determined for each of these packages and the results are displayed in table 4.5. Table 4.5 The energy requirement of nine holiday packages and the percentage of Dutch households each package reflects (source 4.7).

%

Destination Return

hh

Distance

Means of

Duration

transport in days

Tour

GJ/pp

GJ/pp

Party

Per

Per day

(km)

Holiday

23

No Holiday

-

-

-

-

-

-

35

Vlissingen

500

Car

7

4

1

0,1

9

Chamonix

2.040

Car

14

2

6

0,5

6

Antibes

2.800

Car

21

4

4

0,2

3

Tenerife

6.000

Plane

7

2

14

2,0

7

Barcelona

3.200

Coach

14

2

4

0,3

5

Trier

800

Car

14

2

4

0,3

4

Siegen

700

Train

7

4

2

0,2

3

Jakarta

24.000

Plane

14

2

49

3,5

4

Los Angeles

18.000

Plane

14

2

37

2,6

The average requirement for accommodation and transport of long summer holidays is 12.5 GJ per Dutch household. An enormous difference in energy requirements is 59

observed, both per holiday (1 week- 3 weeks) and per day. The holiday in the Netherlands requires 1 GJ/pp, whereas the holiday to Indonesia nearly 50 times as much. The means of transport and distance travelled determine the differences in the energy requirement of various holiday packages. It is striking that no major differences exist in the average energy requirement of each means of transport per person (per kilometre the energy requirement of a car with two persons is, for example, almost identical to that of a Boeing 747-400 per person). However, there are great differences in the distance travelled in each means of transport. This is what determines the energy requirements for a holiday. The percentage of the total energy requirement used by transport varies per package. For the holiday packages that use a car as means of transports, for example, this varies between 50% and 80% (the further the destination, the larger this share). For the holiday-goers that travel by plane to their holiday destination, transport takes up to and exceeding 90 % of the total energy requirements. Again, this share is larger for the destination further afield. Type of accommodation also affects the energy requirements and sleeping in a tent requires the lowest energy. The effect of changing the type of accommodation to a less energy intensive one is greater for destinations that can be reached by car, coach or train. In those cases, changing ones visit to a hotel or rented house to a stay in a tent can result in a reduction of the energy requirement of 10% to 35 % (for more details see source 4.7). The distance travelled to the holiday destination is the single largest determinant of the holiday energy requirements. It should be realised that 7% of the households, those going on a long distance holiday, consume 50% of the total energy consumed by households on holidays. A reduction of the distance is the most important factor in reducing energy requirements.

4.6

Possible changes in purchase behaviour

The energy analysis of products purchased by households led to the following possibilities that may lead to a reduction of household energy use.

60

Vegetables Less greenhouse Less import Less conserved Less frozen More organic Meat Less meat Vegetarian Use of clothes Lifetime extension Higher quality clothing More repair of clothing More careful washing Fashion flexible clothing design Choice of material Lower material density per piece Flowers Fewer flowers in wintertime Less energy intensive flowers Lifetime extension by proper treatment Organically grown flowers Imported flowers instead of greenhouse flowers Bulbs instead of bulbous flowers Indoor plants instead of cut flowers Plastic/textile flowers Other kind of decoration (art) Other presents Holidays / spare time With train instead of car Change from several short holidays to one longer Reduction of distance In tent instead of apartment Sharing caravans/ boats

4.8

Concluding remarks

This chapter shows that large differences in energy requirements exist between comparable products (different types of flowers). This implies that the choice of a product has a substantial impact on household energy requirement. Even within one 61

product, large differences exist (as shown in the example of French beans, but also for flowers bought in different months of the year). Furthermore, the type of product chosen impacts on the direct energy use in households (pre-prepared meals as discussed in Chapter 3). All these variations and their impacts on household practices make it difficult to oversee the consequences of changes for the energy requirements of households and for the national GHG emissions. This enormous variation also implies that households require a lot of detailed knowledge on product level in order to be in a position to make ‘energy saving’ choices.

4.9

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 4.1 Kramer, K.J, H.C. Moll and S. Nonhebel, (1999) Total greenhouse gas emissions related to the Dutch crop production system. Agriculture, ecosystem & environment, No. 72, pp. 9-16.

Source 4.2 Kramer, K.J, H.C. Moll, S. Nonhebel and H.C. Wilting, (1999) Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption. Energy Policy, No. 27, pp. 203216.

Source 4.3 Kramer, K.J., (2000) Food Matters, on reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from household food consumption. PhD Thesis, University of Groningen.

Source 4.4 Potting, J., K. Blok, (2000) Energy requirements and greenhouse gas emissions related to clothing in the Netherlands. Working paper NW&S, Utrecht.

62

Source 4.5 Uitdenbogerd, D.E. and K. Vringer, (1999) Energy reduction options for the domestic maintenance of textiles. H&C Working Paper 9902. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies..

Source 4.6 Vringer, K., and K. Blok, (2000) The energy requirement of cut flowers and consumer options to reduce it. Resources, conservation and recycling, No. 28/2000, pp. 328.

Source 4.7 Berg, M. van den and K. Vringer, (1999) The energy requirements of holidays, and household reduction options. NW&S Report 99112. Utrecht.

63

64

5.

IMPACT OF IMPLEMENTING THE OPTIONS FOR NATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS

5.1

Introduction

From a national perspective, reduction of GHG emissions can occur via two routes: via changes in the demand side (the households), but also via changes in the production sectors (efficiency improvements). Households cannot affect the production sectors but improvements on the supply side do affect GHG emissions attributed to household consumption, since the indirect energy requirements of products and services purchased decrease. The previous chapters identified individual changes within the present household situation that may lead to a reduction of the GHG emissions. We showed that GHG emission reducing changes are possible in nearly all activities within the household. These changes differ in magnitude of effect they bear on GHG emissions. The overall effect on GHG emissions, however, is not easy to determine since several trade offs can be expected, within both the households themselves and the national economy. Refraining from using a freezer, for instance, may imply that households increase their shopping frequency and when they use their car for shopping, the possible savings with respect to the freezer are outweighed by the expenditures for the car. Furthermore, it is likely that options will interfere. The effect of the use of a water saving showerhead on GHG emissions is different when the water is heated with a solar heating system or with a conventional system. Major efficiency improvements in the greenhouses (supply side) will affect the reductions that can be obtained by a change from greenhouse grown vegetables to open ground vegetables. All these interrelations make it difficult to obtain insights in the effect of implementation of the options on nation wide GHG emissions. Therefore, special attention is paid to the integration of the results. This chapter presents an overview of integration results at national level (see source 5.1). Firstly, it offers a description of the methods applied in integrating these results at national level. For applying this method a quantitative description of all options considered is required. This quantitative description of individual options is also provided in this chapter. 65

Besides options in the feeding, clothing and housing activity categories (derived in previous chapters), options for mobility and improved efficiency in direct energy use (heating and lighting) were incorporated. The information on these ‘extra’ options was obtained from other studies on energy reduction in households. In this way, nearly 80% of household energy use was covered. Finally, all options are integrated and the results at national level are presented.

5. 2 Method

The overall effect of all reduction possibilities (supply and demand side) on nationwide GHG emissions is examined by application of an input-output energy analysis. Input-output energy analysis uses economic input-output tables to determine energy use of consumption items in production chains. This method has proved to be a useful tool in investigating energy-economy relationships in combination with production-consumption relationships. To offer an indication of the method applied, the basic formula is discussed. (For more information on method used is referred to source 5.1).

The household energy requirement (E) can be determined with the aid of the following static open input-output model: E = r’ D’ (I-A)-1 y + r’ d

(5.1)

Where: r

is an (m*1) vector with ERE values for each of the m energy carriers;

D

is an (n*m) matrix with energy input coefficients of production sectors for each energy carrier;

I

is the (n*n) unit matrix;

A

is the (n*n) technological matrix (which is the normalised input-output table);

y

is an (n*1) vector with household consumption per sector;

d

is an (m*1) vector with direct energy use of households for each energy carrier.

66

Vector r corresponds with the conversion of energy in the energy sectors, the part D’ (I-A)-1 corresponds with the energy use and production structure of the production sectors, and vectors y and d correspond with consumption patterns and energy use of households respectively. Thus, the part r’ D’ (I-A)-1 y can be considered as the indirect energy requirement Ei, and the part r’ d as the direct energy requirement Ed of households.

These options are implemented in the input-output framework in order to evaluate options for reducing greenhouse gases. Each reduction option corresponds to changes in one or more parameter elements of the input-output models. Technological options concerning energy efficiency improvements in both conversion and end-use of energy are implemented in the input-output models by changing parameters r, D and d. Other options concerning changes in production processes in order to save energy, e.g. substitution of materials or changes in productivity, are implemented in the inputoutput models via parameter A. The implementation of changes in household consumption patterns is performed via parameter y. However, in practice, demandside options may also affect other parameters, e.g. d and A. As an example, figure 5.1 shows the elements in parameters A and y which are changed to calculated the impact the reduction option - a shift from plastic to wooden furniture. The coefficients in the furniture production column corresponding with the use of plastic and wood are changed. Considering the level of detail in energy conservation options, the input-output table used should be at a low aggregation level. The table used is a so-called homogeneous input-output table (246 product groups). The rows and columns in homogeneous input-output tables correspond to commodities, which can be considered as collections of goods that are produced in the same way. The column corresponding to a commodity can be considered as a representation of the production process of that commodity. The homogeneous table used consists of separate rows and columns of plastic and wooden furniture. The shift from plastic to wooden furniture is then implemented by changing two elements in consumption vector y. The effect of options in combination is determined by simultaneously changing several model parameters. The effect of changes in the production structure can also be studied with the aid of this model. 67

In this project the model was used for: -

Determining the effect of individual options on national GHG emissions.

-

Determining the effects of options in combination.

-

Determining the effects of reduction options in the production sectors.

-

Combination of reduction in the production sectors with implementation of options in the households.

Figure 5.1 Elements of technological matrix A and consumption vector y that are changed in case of a shift from plastic to wooden furniture (source: 5.1).

A

p w

f

plastic

*

wood

*

furniture

y

*

5. 3 Description of the options and their effects in I/O-models terms

Up until this point, options were described in a qualitative way. To determine the effect of their implementation on the GHG emissions these options have to be described in terms of the I/O-model. Therefore, an exact description had to be made for each option: what is changed, to what extent and what are the trade offs of such change. The information required to describe the options was obtained from studies discussed in previous chapters. In tables 5.1-5.4, the options studied and their descriptions are summarised per activity category (a more detailed description of the

68

Table 5.1 Description of the options concerning the activity category feeding. Dishwashing also belongs to this activity (source 5.1).

Option

Assumptions

Substitution greenhouse vegetables

Open ground vegetables replace all greenhouse vegetables.

by open ground vegetables Substitution conserved vegetables

Open ground vegetables replace all conserved vegetables.

by open ground vegetables Less meat

Daily meat consumption is reduced to 100 grams pp.

More vegetarian

Eggs, pulses or nuts replace 30% of meat consumption.

No car for shopping

All shopping is done by bicycle: costs for cars decrease by 6% and costs for bikes increase by 20 %.

Delivery service

Delivery service provides all food: energy cost for shopping decrease by 75%.

Move refrigerators and freezers to

All are moved: decrease energy for cooling and freezing with 42

cellars

%, increase costs for housing 2% (not all houses have cellars).

Efficient freezer/fridge

Purchase best available appliance: reduction energy costs for cooling by 75%.

Change from electricity to gas

All equipment is changed (decrease electricity and increase gas

cooking equipment

use).

Efficient cooker

Purchase best available cooker: reduction energy costs for cooking by 40%.

Dishwashing by hand

Discontinue all dishwasher use, reduction both in indirect energy (dishwasher itself) as in direct energy.

Less rinsing

Decrease energy requirements for dishwashing by 23 %.

Efficient dishwasher

Purchase best available dishwasher: reduction energy costs for dishwashing by 65%.

assumptions made per option can be found in source 5.1). Figure 5.2 shows the savings in energy use and associated reductions of greenhouse gases as a result of several options in the activity feeding. The savings are compared with the 1990 figures for total household energy requirements and GWP. As a result of individual options being adopted, reductions in GHG emissions are at a magnitude of 0.5 to 1.5% of national emissions. Cooling and freezing are the options with the largest reduction potential. For options concerning a decrease in meat consumption, the reduction in GHG emissions is bigger than the reduction in energy use as a result of decreasing CH4 and N2O emissions in 69

cattle breeding. A shift from greenhouse to open-ground vegetables has more effect on energy use than on GHG emissions, due to the high share of natural gas in greenhouse horticulture. Figure 5.2 Savings in energy use and GWP as a result of implementing demand-side reduction options concerning activity category feeding expressed as percentages of total household energy requirements and emissions (source: 5.1)

GWP

Energy

dish-washing: more efficient appliances dish-washing: less rinsing dish-washing: by hand cooking: more efficient appliances cooking: natural gas instead of electricity cooling/freezing: more efficient appliances cooling/freezing: appliances in cellar delivery service no car use in purchasing food products more vegetarian (30% less meat)) less meat and fish (at most 100 grams a day) open-ground vegetables instead of greenhouse vegetables fresh instead of conserved vegetables 0

0.5

1 savings (%)

70

1.5

2

Table 5.2 Description of the options concerning the activity category clothing (source 5.1)

Option

Assumptions

Substitution synthetic clothing

All synthetic fibres are replaced by wool or cotton, no changes in maintenance costs (washing and drying).

Shoes lifetime extension through

Costs increase three times, lifetime quadruples, shoe industry

purchase higher quality shoes

declines, shoe repair increases with 50%.

Less frequent washing

Doubling the number of wearing days, energy use for washing and drying halves, lifetime machines double.

Improved efficiency washing

Includes higher load, lower temperature, efficient machine and hot fill: reduction energy use with 65%.

Improved efficiency drying

Includes higher load, better spin drying, most efficient machine and gas-fired drier: results in reduction with 65%.

Line drying

Reduction both direct and indirect energy (no machine required) reduction with 90%, energy consequences for required extra space are not included.

Sharing appliances

Two households share one dryer and one washing machine; lifetime is reduced from 10-7 years.

Lifetime extension appliances

Purchase higher quality machines: price increase 30%, lifetime doubles.

Figure 5.3 Savings in energy use and GWP, as a result of implementing demand-side reduction options concerning activity category clothing expressed in percentage of total household energy requirements and emissions (source: 5.1).

GWP

Energy

washing/drying: lifetime extension machines washing/drying: share appliances drying: line drying: improved efficiency washing: improved efficiency clothes: longer wearing shoes: lifetime extension clothes: natural materials 0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

savings (%)

71

Figure 5.3 offers an overview on the effects of the individual reduction options concerning activity-category clothing, the consumption-related energy use and GHG emissions. Reduction that can be obtained per option is rather small - between 0.250.75 %. Options with the highest impact on the household energy requirements concern line drying and longer wearing of clothes. No differences between energy and GWP were observed. In the housing category, most options mentioned concern reductions in direct energy use: electricity for lighting and appliances and natural gas for heating (table 5.3). The options that affect the indirect energy use, concern furniture and decoration (flowers and floor covering). Figure 5.4 shows the overall effects of the options concerning consumption activity housing on household energy requirements. Savings in the order of 15% of 1990 household energy requirements can be achieved by efficiency improvements in heating, appliances and lighting. The use of natural gas involves less GHG emissions than using other energy carriers. Since natural gas is the main energy carrier in heating and warm water production, the effects on total emissions are smaller than the effects on total household energy requirements. The reductions obtainable through indirect energy use are less than 0.5 %. Table 5.3 Description of the options concerning the activity category housing (source 5.1).

Option Heating/hot

Assumptions water:

improved

efficiency

Combination technology (including heat pumps) in all dwellings. Reduction use natural gas with 75%, increase electricity use with 25%.

Lowering room temperature

Decrease 1 oC: reduces energy for heating by 9 %, but requires more clothes (10%) and more washing: (20%).

Improved efficiency lighting

68% reduction energy for lighting

Appliances: improved efficiency

Best available techniques

Appliances: lifetime extension

Purchase of higher quality products

Furniture lifetime extension

Doubling price, doubling lifetime and reduction amount of materials used by 25%.

Floor covering

Replacement of all synthetic materials by natural materials: expenditures rise.

Decoration; cut flowers

72

Purchase of less energy intensive flowers reduction of 23 %

Figure 5.4 Savings in energy use and GWP as a result of implementing demand-side reduction options concerning activity category housing expressed as percentages of total household energy requirements and emissions (source 5.1).

GWP

Energy

decoration: alternatives for cut flowers furniture: lifetime extension floor-covering: natural materials appliances: lifetime extension appliances: improved efficiency lighting: improved efficiency heating: lower temperature heating and warm water: improved efficiency 0

5

10

15

savings (%)

Table 5.4 Description of the options in the category ‘other consumption activities’ (source 5.1).

Option

Assumptions

Sharing daily and weekly papers

50% of daily and weekly papers are shared.

Sharing tools

Three households share tools: energy requirement reduced to 33%.

Sharing caravan and boots

Two households share, lifetime reductions from 10 to 7 years. Reduction material use (indirect energy).

Sharing cars

Two households share one car: reduction lifetime from 10 to 7 years. Fewer cars required.

Presents: no cut flowers

25% of flower purchases are replaced by alternative gifts (cds, wines etc.) for same price

Holidays: halving the distance

Reduction holiday costs, fuel, car repairs, rail services and air services by 50%

Holidays: travelling by train

50% of car and plane holidays are replaced by train.

Holidays other

Half of the overnight stays in hotels etc. are replaced by staying

accommodation

in tent or caravan.

73

Figure 5.5 Savings in energy use and GWP as a result of implementing demand-side reduction options concerning sharing, presents and holidays expressed as percentages of total household energy requirements and emissions (source: 5.1)

GWP

Energy

holidays: tent instead of hotel holidays: train instead of car and plane holidays: halving distance presents: alternatives for flowers and plants sharing: cars sharing: caravans and boats sharing: tools sharing: newspapers and weeklies 0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

savings (%)

Figure 5.5 shows the individual effects of demand-side options concerning sharing, presents and holidays on the 1990 figures for energy use related to household consumption and associated GHG emissions. Options with the highest savings concern mobility.

5.3

Supply side reduction options

The effect of improvement of the efficiency of production sectors on household energy requirements was quantified on basis of data from literature available on the subject (for description of used data see source 5.1). The measures were implemented in the model by changing the parameters r, D and A. Figure 5.6 gives an overview of the savings in energy requirements and GWP (global warming potential) related to household consumption as a result of energy efficiency improvements in several economic production sectors. The savings are compared with the 1990 reference values. The savings are mainly accomplished by measures in industrial and service sectors.

74

Figure 5.6 Savings in energy use and GWP as a result of implementing technical energy conservation options in production sectors expressed as percentages of total household energy requirements and emissions (source: 5.1).

GWP

Energy

Energy Supply System Transport Services Construction Industry - other Industry - metal products Industry - basic metal Industry - building materials Industry - chemical products Industry - paper Industry - textiles Industry - food Agri- and horticulture 0

2

4

6

8

10

savings (%)

5.4

Integration of the results at different levels of scale.

The methodology used makes it possible to study the effect of implementing options at various levels: as an individual option, all options within an activity, all options within a household (demand side), and all options within households in combination with energy saving measures in industry (supply side). The results of these integration steps are shown in table 5.6. The difference between the sum of the results and the result of the integration is given for each step. For example, when savings of the individual options within the activity of feeding are summed a value of 5.7 % is calculated. However, when all options are implemented in the household, some trade offs will occur within the category. The effect of moving a freezer to the cellar is diminished when this freezer is a very efficient model. This implies the energy saving obtainable through implementing all these options is only 4.9%. Comparable effects are found for the other categories too; the integration result is smaller than the sum. Main savings can be made through options concerning the activity of housing. These options mainly concern efficiency improvements in heating and warm water production. When all options are implemented in the households, the overall 75

reduction obtainable is 27.4% (which is smaller than the categories’ results), which shows that tradeoffs between categories also occurs (lowering room temperature implies increase of energy within the activity clothing).

Alongside the reduction within the households, it is likely that reduction options are also implemented in industry energy. All options in industry lead to a reduction of 30.4 %. The implementation of energy saving options however interferes with the effect of the options in households (as shown in the example of energy saving in glasshouses in the introduction). The overall effect of implementing all options, both in industry and in households, lead to a reduction of over 50% of total national energy use. Within this project, attention was also paid to the effects of implementing options on the emissions of non- CO2 GHG gasses, but these results does not lead to a different picture. Furthermore, attention was paid to the impact of implementing options in expenditures and employment. In general, the implementation of options leads to a decrease of household expenditures. Since lower expenditures result in lower production in economic sectors, total employment related to household consumption also decreases. In source 5.1, the effects of reduction options on employment are discussed in more detail. Table 5.6 The effect of implementing options in various activity categories on national CO2 emissions (in % reduction). The ‘sum’ concerns the results of adding effects of individual options, integration result concern the effect when all options within a category are implemented.

Activity

Sum

Integration result

Feeding

5.7

4.9

Clothing

3.2

2.2

Housing

20.1

18.6

Other

3.4

2.9

Total Households

27.4

Production sector

30.4

Total

54.2

76

5.5

Concluding remarks

The reduction of GHG emission achievable through implementing individual options is small up to 1 % of the annual emissions. Only options concerning heating result in a larger reduction, that being 15%. Although the reductions of individual options are small, the overall result of implementation of all options is considerable and a reduction of 28% is obtained. When changes in the production sectors are also considered, the national GHG emissions are reduced by 50%. These results show the enormous impact of household consumption on national GHG emissions. It also shows that a large potential for reduction exists, but that this reduction can only be obtained by a large number of small changes. The small reductions are caused by the fact that the changes suggested are small, i.e. instead of changing to a complete vegetarian diet, eating less meat is proposed. Larger changes are likely to result in larger reductions. The main purpose of this study, however, is to find feasible and acceptable reduction options for the households, options that imply large changes are assumed to have a lower feasibility. The next chapter looks into the feasibility of the options mentioned.

5.6

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 5.1 Wilting, H.C., H.C. Moll and S. Nonhebel, (1999) An integrative Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Options. OR. 101. Groningen: University of Groningen.

77

78

6.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OPTIONS IN HOUSEHOLDS

6.1

Introduction

Household behaviour can have large impacts on national GHG emissions, which is shown by the fact that implementing all options in all households reduces GHG emissions by nearly 30%. Since a large variation in household behaviour exists, it is not likely that all households will implement all changes suggested, so that the actual reduction of GHG emissions will be smaller than the potential calculated in the previous chapter. The feasibility of implementing options within households was studied to obtain an indication of the actual reduction of GHG emissions. This was done with the aid of two surveys. In the first, the consequences of implementing options for household behaviour were studied qualitatively. This was done for the options concerning the activity categories feeding and clothing. The second survey focussed on the options in all categories and the feasibility with respect to each other was evaluated. The number of households willing to implement an option was determined. In both surveys, attention was paid to: existing knowledge with respect to an option, the willingness of households to change and the possible constraints for implementing options. The results give information on the feasibility of options in the first place but also give information on how this feasibility can be improved. For example, when households do not know that a dryer requires a lot of energy, something can be done with improved information. When one finds an option too expensive, subsidies might be a tool to improve feasibility, but when people do not like vegetarian meals, there are not many possibilities to influence acceptability of this option. Source 6.1 reports the results of the survey on feeding and clothing in detail. These results are discussed in paragraph 6.2. In paragraph 6.3 the results of the survey on the feasibility of all options are presented, the main source for results of this paragraph is source 6.2.

79

6.2

The activity categories feeding and clothing

For all options suggested in the activity categories of feeding and clothing, an inventory was drawn up containing the major limitations observed by household in implementation and how these limitations related to household characteristics. The major findings with respect to the acceptability of options for feeding and clothing found in the survey are given below (source 6.1).

6.2.1 Feeding Options within the activity category of feeding concern changes in acquisition, storing, menu composition, preparation and moment of consumption. The major findings are given below.

Transport By and large, households that do not already frequently use their car for purchases are positive about ‘less use of the car for shopping’. It seems that households that do their food purchases more often on a small scale (in small quantities) are less willing to change their car use. Lower car use also affects the kind of products chosen. It seems that households with more frequent (small) purchase habits find it is easier to use seasonal vegetables. Lowering the use of the car might also influence the size of frozen stock, since large frozen stock is correlated with frequent car use. At present, households do not frequently use a home delivery service. The reasons for not using a delivery service are primarily that households think they do not need such services and furthermore that this service is for the “old and disabled”. Much resistance exists against this option.

Vegetables Many households assume that they already eat seasonal vegetables, as there are always fresh (imported or greenhouse) vegetables at the greengrocers. About 15% of households gave reasons why they do not buy seasonal vegetables. These included: not enough variation, prefer salads in the winter, not durable, children do not like cabbage all winter. These respondents probably know what seasonal vegetables are. 80

Organically grown food is the option with the highest positive response in this survey. A positive attitude exists for using organic food. Problems with this option however are mainly related to price and accessibility. These problems seem to produce barriers against eating more organic food in future.

Meat Households that eat vegetarian meals are more inclined to increase this in future than are households that do not often eat vegetarian meals. Households gave the following reasons for being reluctant to decrease meat consumption: ‘we already eat vegetarian often enough’, ‘members of the family do not like it’, ‘we like the taste of meat’ and ‘vegetarian food is not environmentally friendly’. Higher educated households with young children are more concerned about the healthiness of food and therefore are more inclined to eat vegetarian meals (and organic food).

Storage 30% of the respondents were willing to buy and use less frozen products. Reasons for not willing to change include: the convenience of having a frozen stock and that purchase behaviour have to be changed if the freezer cannot be used anymore.

Preparation Households with a low number of electric appliances are willing to use them less often.

Consumption The size of a household tends to be important for its willingness to change to eating together more often. A smaller household eats together more often and is more willing to improve this. Reasons for absence are work, sport, family or friends, meetings, driving lessons and traffic jams. 15% of households are willing to eat together more often in future.

81

6.2.2 Clothing Options within the activity category of clothing concern changes in washing, drying and material choice. The major findings are given below.

Washing Washing at lower temperatures is acceptable to about 24% of households when certain conditions are met, such as improved detergents and washing programs. Larger washing machines loads in family households is practically impossible as family households are already close to the maximum loading capacity according the washing advice for certain materials. Households that are willing to increase their loads already load a little higher on average. Smaller washing machines are not a feasible option for family households; too many people in households and too much laundry.

Drying More selective tumble drier use is an option for many households, but the way this is done differs. It varies from more line drying outside to more line drying inside and the use of the dryer only for small articles (socks and underwear). Again, households that already use a dryer selectively are more inclined to diminish use. Most households desire more space for line drying. However, the size of the space that would seem convenient to the respondents is such that it costs more energy to obtain/build the space in the house than using a tumble drier. Gas-fired dryers. The number of households that is willing change from a regular tumble drier to a gas fired drier is equal to the number of households that change from not having one at all to a gas fired drier. This occurs for the same reason - gas fired dryers use less energy. Respondents who recently had bought a tumble drier were not familiar with the ecolabelling scheme. Only one in eight knew the scheme well enough to apply. It may be doubted whether the scheme has a lot of influence.

82

Use of materials In general, more woollen articles and more polyester in bedding are not acceptable because of their properties. Woollen articles are itchy or too warm, polyester in bedding is uncomfortable because of moisture and because of ‘pilling’. However, in the higher income classes, wool has a more positive image and is associated with good appearance. Linking wool to a better image might increase the use of wool. The question of whether it is possible to use clothing longer was positively answered by 32% of respondents. In this group, clothing is worn longer already. Apparently, there are significant differences in norms. Comments for not being able to wear cloths for longer durations are ‘already long enough’, ‘hygiene’, ‘synthetics and smells’ and ‘situation or children’s' behaviour difficult to change’. Solutions for reducing washing mentioned were ‘using aprons’, ‘change more often for different activities’, ‘airing’, etc.

6.3

Discussion

None of the options suggested for feeding and clothing are acceptable to all households. The reasons for this low acceptance differ per option. (I don’t like vegetarian food, not enough room for line drying, etc.). ‘Money’ is rarely mentioned as reason for not practising. What is especially striking about these results is that households in which suggested options are already being practised mention that they are willing to do it (the option) more often (more vegetarian meals, more line drying and wearing clothes longer). In general, these practices are not implemented in the household for environmental reasons but something else: health (organic food), like the smell (outdoor drying) etc. In addition, they don’t mind doing it for sake of the environment. Moreover, it is shown that essential knowledge is lacking. For instance, the existing eco-scheme for household appliances is not known well enough. This lack of knowledge observed in the first survey was the reason for paying extra attention to options knowledge within households in the second survey.

83

6.4

Options in relation to each other

The second survey was carried out among 350 households by means of a questionnaire. Since investigation of all options would require too much of the households’ time, which would negatively affect their willingness to participate, only the 32 most promising options were evaluated. From each option, information was obtained concerning: present situation, existing knowledge, magnitude of the change and reasons for not changing. To give an impression of type of information obtained the results for energy saving light bulbs (ESLB) are presented. From all options this type of information is available, (source 6.2) results are summarised in table 6.1. For energy saving light bulbs (ESLB) the results were: 28% of households does not possess ESLBs and, of this group 25% mentions that they are willing to buy them in future, 14% is unwilling and 61% may in future. However, of the households that already possess ESLBs, 54% mentions that they are willing to buy more, 37% maybe and 9% are unwilling. The most well known options were: energy saving light bulbs, driving less car, use bicycle, lowering average room temperature, water saving shower head, no car at all and washing at lower temperatures. The least known options include the replacement of cut flowers and the replacement of frozen/imported vegetables with conserved vegetables. In addition, 45% of households were unaware of the existence of ‘green electricity’. On average, willingness to implement an option is low, highest values found lay in order of 30% (which means that 30% of households mention that they are willing to implement the particular option.). Most options ‘score’ lower (car away: 7%, holidays closer to home: 19%). About 8% of households mention that they are not able to implement any of the suggested reduction options.

The acceptability of the 32 reduction options in the second survey assessed in two ways. First per reduction option – the acceptance percentages can range from 0% to 100% of households (as mentioned in the example of the ESLBs). Secondly, at the end of the survey the respondents were asked to choose 4 reduction options out of 32 that they would like to try. 84

Table 6.1 Preferences per reduction option and 4 chosen out 32 (> or < than 12.5%) (source 6.2).

Acceptable

Maybe

Not acceptable

Yes > 25%

Yes 10-25%

Yes < 10%

preference

Energy saving light bulbs

Heat lower during day time

Solar water heating

> 12.5%

Energy saving appliances

Use drier more selectively

Green electricity

High

Pre-wash dishes cold Plants instead of cut flowers Gifts instead of cut flowers Tins/glass instead frozen veg. Tins/glass instead greenhouse/ imported veg. Water saving shower head Low

Natural floor coverings

Share a car through a company

Put the car away

preference

Share car with households

Lighter cars

Not replace the

< 12.5%

Drive less car

Eco cut flowers

freezer

Kilometres -> bicycle

Not replace the tumble drier

Smaller refrigerator

Replace meat

Smaller freezer

Wash at lower

Kilometres - public transport

temperatures

Holiday closer to home Holiday longer/further/less often Tent instead apartment/house Use textile longer prior to washing*

In table 6.2 the results of the question to the four most favourite options are also given. The columns represent the acceptance percentages for the individual options, while the rows the results of the question which four options one would like to try. It is likely that the two upper left cells represent promising reduction options. The two lower right cells represent the least promising options of which no change can be expected. The upper right cell and lower left cell represent reduction options that might require prior conditions being met and much convincing before they could be 85

successful. The most desired reduction options are: energy saving light bulbs, energy efficient household appliances, replacement of cut flowers by plants or other presents, water saving showerheads, replacement of greenhouse/imported vegetables with conserved vegetables. The less popular options are: no car, no freezer, no dryer and more public transport.

6.5

Choice for options and household characteristics

The results mentioned above are the average results of the survey among 350 households with children. It is shown that an enormous variation exists within households in this category so the average results gave relatively little information. Therefore, extra attention is paid to influence of various household characteristics on households’ willingness to implement certain reduction options. It is shown that three groups can be recognised. One group with consumption patterns of a very low energy requirement. This low energy requirement is caused by extreme environmental awareness or the result of lack of financial resources. This group has no options of reducing their energy requirements any further. A second group at the other end has a very energy-intensive consumption pattern. This group mentions that there are several options for reducing the environmental impact of their consumption patterns (get rid of one of the cars and purchase a solar water heating system) and a very large group in the middle. This latter middle group has implemented some of the suggested options already and generally for other reasons than that of the environment. (they regularly eat vegetarian meals for health reasons, or dry the washing outside on a line because they like the smell of clothes dried outside.) This group is willing to use options introduced already more often (more vegetarian meals and more line drying).

86

6.6

Discussion and concluding remarks

The information obtained in both surveys gives the same picture. In general, willingness to change is small and the reasons for not willing differ per option and per household. Options that are already implemented in households are the most popular (households want to do it more). Furthermore, is shown that essential knowledge is lacking (eco-scheme on appliances and green electricity etc.) Generally speaking, it can be said that options that have a minimal effect on household behaviour (energy efficient appliances) turn out to be most popular. Furthermore, options with respect to the composition of the meals turn out to be of interest, although replacement of meat with vegetarian products seems unfeasible. All options which affect mobility (cars, public transport and holidays) at not at all popular. The limited willingness to change (most popular options only score 30%) implies that actual reduction of emissions due to changes in households is much lower than the potential calculated in Chapter 5 (order of magnitude 5%). This means that not much reduction of GHG emissions may be expected, due to changes in households without external interference.

The results obtained in this chapter, however, provide information to increase this percentage. In the first place, it is shown that essential knowledge on this subject is frequently lacking in many households. On the other hand, it is shown that options that have already been part of ‘energy saving information campaigns’ are widely known (cars, energy saving light bulbs, lower room temperature, etc.). This shows that campaigning leads to improved knowledge and awareness within households. Only options that fit within present individual household practices have a chance of becoming implemented. Since these households’ practices vary, tailor made advise for households, concerning energy reduction options, is essential for improving the potential for change. Furthermore, it appears that money is rarely mentioned as a limitation, which sheds doubts on the potential for household change induced by mere financial measures such as subsidies and taxes.

87

6.7

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 6.1 Uitdenbogerd, D.E., N.M. Brouwer and J.P. Groot-Marcus, (1998) Domestic energy saving

potentials

for

food

and

textiles:

an

empirical

study.

H&C

onderzoeksrapport 2. Wageningen: Wageningen Agricultural University.

Source 6.2 Uitdenbogerd,

D.

E.,

J.P.

Groot-Marcus

and

M.J.

Terpstra,

(1999)

De

(on)mogelijkheden om binnen de huishoudvoering milieuvriendelijker te zijn. De eerste resultaten van de survey. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies.

88

7.

EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS

7.1

Introduction

Chapter 5 showed that by introducing several small changes in household behaviour a potential reduction of the CO2 emissions on national level of 30% could be obtained. In this chapter, the results found are put into a broader context. In the first place, attention is also paid to the other greenhouse gasses. The major part of this report focuses on reducing energy use and related CO2 emissions. The consequences of excluding the others are studied. The second part of this chapter provides an international comparison. The results presented up to now are typical for the Dutch situation. The methods developed and knowledge obtained, however, are not nationspecific and can be used to study GHG emissions related to consumption in other countries. Customs with respect to feeding, housing, clothing etc. differ between countries, which will result in different consumption patterns. It shall be interesting to investigate the effect of these other consumption patterns on energy requirements. In first case, to get an impression how Dutch consumption patterns relate to other western consumption patterns with respect to their related GHG emissions. However, it is also possible that other consumption patterns will provide new ideas on reduction options. Therefore, comparison is made between GHG emissions related to Dutch consumption patterns and consumption patterns of other EU countries. Finally, a comparison is made with other recent studies on possibilities for energy reduction in Dutch households. A short description of the other projects is provided and their results are discussed.

7.2

Contribution of other GHGs to the overall GHG-emission attributed to consumer goods

The enhanced greenhouse effect in not only caused by emissions of CO2. Several other gases exist which affect the radiative balance of the atmosphere. CO2 emissions are related to energy use and occur almost everywhere in the product life cycle. Emissions of other greenhouse gases are related to specific processes, so emissions of the other greenhouse gasses differ strongly per product. The most important non-CO2 89

greenhouse

gases

(GHGs)

are

methane,

CH4,

dinitrous

oxide,

N2O,

hydrofluorcarbons, HFC, perfluorcarbons, PFC and sulfurhexafluoride, SF6. Their global warming potential is much larger than that of CO2 and these are shown in table: 7.1. This implies that relatively small emissions of these gasses can have large effects on the climate. Emissions of N2O and CH4 occur mostly in agriculture and their emissions are discussed in the study on food (Chapter 4). It was shown that introduction of N2O and CH4 led to new insights concerning GHG emissions attributed to food. It is not possible to evaluate the GHG emissions of all consumer goods purchased in Dutch households, since this requires process analysis of all products. Here, the consequences of excluding the non- CO2 GHG emissions from the evaluation are determined. Therefore, an inventory of the sources of the most important greenhouse gasses is provided. Based on this knowledge, four consumer products were chosen, the production of which involves non- CO2 emissions. Emissions during the life cycle of these products were determined in detail and comparison is made with the ‘only CO2’ evaluation. The study on non- CO2 gases is reported in source 7.1, the main results of which are listed here.

Table 7.1 Global Warming Potential (CO2/kg) of greenhouse gasses studied in this chapter (source 7.1)

90

GHG

Global warming potential

CO2

1

CH4

21

N2O

310

HFC

9000

PFC

7000

SF6

24000

7.2.1 Main sources of non- CO2 GHGs

CH4 Total emissions of CH4 in Europe were estimated to be 504 Mtonne CO2 equivalents in 1990. The following sources were mentioned: agriculture (40% of the total), waste treatment (33%), fugitive emission of solid fuels, e.g. coal (12%), fugitive emission due to distribution and transport of oil and natural gas fuels (7%), fuel combustion (4%), industrial process (2%) and land change and forestry (2%). Agricultural emissions of CH4 are mainly due to enteric fermentation (74%) and manure management (21%). Landfill (83%) and wastewater treatment (9%) are main contributors of CH4 emissions originating from waste treatment. N2O Total emissions of N2O in Europe were estimated to be 279 Mtonne CO2-eq. in 1990. The following sources of abiogenic N2O were distinguished: agriculture (42% of total emissions), industrial processes (35%), fuel combustion (13%), the use of three-way catalysts in cars (4%), land use change and forestry (4%), waste water treatment (1%), and other sources (1%).

HFC Total emissions of HFC in Europe were estimated to be 137 Mtonne CO2-eq. in 1995. HFC originates from: refrigeration (97 Mtonne), HCFC-22 production (12-37 Mtonne), foam (6-60 Mtonne) and other sources such as solvents, aerosols and fire extinguishers.

PFC Total emissions of PFC in Europe were estimated to be 67 Mtonne CO2-eq. in 1995. These emissions are mainly due to primary aluminium production by electrolysis. Other sources of PFCs include etching in the semiconductor industry, incineration plants, the production of fluorine gas, steel mills and cement works.

91

SF6 Total emissions of SF6 in Europe in 1995 were estimated to be 14 Mtonne CO2-eq., mostly due to the use of high (and medium) voltage switches in the electricity distribution network. SF6 is also used as insulation gas in magnesium smelting, noise isolating windows, the production of car tyres, the semiconductor industry and in sport shoes and tennis balls.

Four consumer products were selected; the production and use of which may contribute significantly to emissions of non-CO2 GHG emissions: Electricity, the distribution of which leads to emissions of CH4, N2O and SF6. Drink-cans, in which the aluminium contents contribute to CH4, N2O and PFC emissions. Carpets, in which the nylon contents contribute to CH4 and N2O emissions. Driving cars was selected for four reasons: -

The use of fuel results in CH4 and N2O emissions,

-

The use of three-way catalysts in passenger cars causes enhanced N2O emissions,

-

The potential increased in the use of magnesium and aluminium in a car’s body leads to SF6 and PFC emissions respectively, and

-

The potential increased in the use of air conditioning in passenger cars contributes to HFC emissions.

7.2.2 Results and discussion

The results of the four case studies (table 7.2): electricity, drinking cans, carpets and car driving; show that the unit share, per product, of non-CO2 GHGs such as CH4, N2O, HFC, PFC and SF6 can be collectively significant when compared to the emission of CO2. The total of all GHG emissions varies from 100% (electricity), up to 400% (carpet with woollen pile) of CO2 emissions. So including non- CO2 gases can lead to different results, than those when evaluating CO2 solely. Therefore, changes can be expected on product level. On the other hand, it shows that N2O and CH4 are the primary emissions that cause the differences.

92

Table 7.2 GHG emissions attributed to production and use of the four products studied in this paragraph. GHG emissions are expressed as the percentage of CO2 emissions.

Electricity

Aluminium Can Carpet wool

Steel car

CO2

100

100

100

100

CO2 CH4

104.8

387

103.5

CO2 CH4 N2O

105.3

396

110

CO2 CH4 N2O SF6

105.9

CO2 CH4 N2O PFC

106.7

120

133

This is due to the fact that, although their GWP values are relatively low, their emissions are quite large. The GWP values of the other gasses are higher but their emissions are relatively small, so that their overall effect is limited. The main source of CH4 and N2O is agriculture; emissions occurring in this production sector are included in the food study conducted in the context of this project (Chapter 4). CH4 and N2O also occur in fibre production (CH4 in wool and N2O in cotton and synthetics). These non- CO2 emissions were not included in the clothing study done within this project. Based on the information obtained in this paragraph, it can be expected that emissions related to clothes are higher than calculated in Chapter 4. However, since all values will increase, CH4 due to wool and N2O due to cotton and synthetics, the differences between the fibres will remain. Furthermore, it was shown in Chapter 4 that the production of these fibres involves only a small part of the total emissions during life cycle of the products. Including the other greenhouse gasses will not lead to different insights on national level.

7.3

European comparison

The international comparison was done using two different methods. Firstly, Dutch product energy intensities were coupled with household expenditure data from other countries (a budget study); and secondly, on a higher level of scale, where individual countries’ sectorial energy intensities were determined by applying input/output methodology. Earlier research has shown that results of both methods are not the same (source 7.2). The study using the first method is reported in source 7.3 and that of the sectorial energy intensities in source 7.4.

93

7.3.1 Comparison using household expenditure data Method and data The cumulative energy requirements of household consumption (E) can be calculated with equation 1. E = ∑ε i • Si n

eq 7.1

i=1

where i is a consumption category, n is the total number of consumption categories, åi is the energy intensity of consumption category i (MJ/c), and Si is the expenditure in consumption category i (c) (c is the currency)

This formula is used to calculate the impact of different consumption patterns on the household energy requirements of several European countries. The energy intensities of various Dutch consumption categories are known from earlier studies. This data was coupled with data from budget studies of other European countries. Data on households’ average annual expenditures based on Household Budget Surveys in 1994 were used. The Central Statistics Office of the European Union, Eurostat, supplied the data. The data was corrected for differences in purchasing power parities between the Netherlands and the countries considered. Household energy requirements in the following countries were determined Belgium (B), Denmark (DK), Greece (EL), Spain (E), Italy (I), Luxembourg (L), the Netherlands (NL), Portugal (P), Finland (FIN), Sweden (S) and the United Kingdom (UK). Many adaptations were required since data sets were inconsistent; these are reported in source 7.3. Measured data, provided by the IEA, on energy use in the residential sector was used to determine the direct energy requirement of households in other countries.

94

Household expenditure About 82 million households exist in the 11 EU member states examined. In 1994, their total expenditure amounted 1610 thousand million ECU. The share of household expenditure in the United Kingdom is the largest (32 %), followed by Italy (27 %) and Spain (14 %). This is due mainly to these countries’ large populations. The remaining countries contribute even or less than 7 % to the total expenditure in the 11 countries concerned. Due to its small number of inhabitants, the share of Luxembourg is a mere 0.3 %, and hence can be neglected. Annual household expenditures differ considerably between countries. The highest level of total household expenditure is found in Luxembourg (37,0 kECU/hh/year) and towers above all other values. Excluding Luxembourg from the sample results in a set of expenditures ranging from 14,7 kECU/hh/year (Finland) to 22,0 kECU/hh/year (Italy). The average EU household spends 19.7 kECU/year: 25% on housing, 20 % on food and beverages, 9% on recreation and culture, 8% on transport (excluding fuels), 7 % on clothing and footwear, 7 % on furnishings, 6 % on hotels, cafes and restaurants, 5 % on electricity, gas and other fuels for home heating, 5 % on miscellaneous goods and services, 4 % on fuels for transport, 2 % on communications and 1 % on education.

Household energy requirement The combination of household expenditures with energy intensities provides the household energy requirement (eq. 7.1). Since large differences in energy intensities exist; the share of energy in various categories is different from that in spending. An annual total of 22.5 EJ of energy is required to fulfil the need for direct and indirect energy in all households in the 11 EU member states concerned. The annual household energy requirement differs considerably between countries. The highest value of total energy requirement is found for Luxembourg (508 GJ/hh/year), which exceeds all other values. If Luxembourg is excluded from the sample the total energy requirement ranges from 180 GJ/hh/year (Portugal) to 328 GJ/hh/year (Sweden). The average EU household has an energy requirement of 274 GJ/year. The direct energy requirement ranges from 60 GJ/hh/year (Portugal) to 210 GJ/hh/year (Sweden). The indirect energy requirement varies from 103 GJ/hh/year 95

(Finland) to 162 GJ/hh/year (Italy). Large differences exist between countries’ share in the direct energy requirement and in their total energy requirement. In Portugal, direct energy is only 34 % of the total, whereas in Sweden and Finland it amounts to 64 % (figure 7.1). Figure 7.1 Share of direct and indirect energy use of households in different European countries.

share 0.70

0.00 BEL

DEN

GR

SPA

ITA

LUX

indirect

NL

POR

FIN

SWE

UK

direct

An average EU household requires energy for (in decreasing order): electricity, gas and other fuels for home heating (34 %), food and beverages (19 %), fuels for transport (13 %), housing (8 %), recreation and culture (6 %), transport (excluding fuel) (5 %), furnishings (4 %), hotels, cafes and restaurants (4 %), clothing and footwear (3 %) and miscellaneous goods and services (2 %). The share of energy required for communications and education may be neglected. Large deviations occur in these averages. In figure 7.2 provides the average EU energy requirements and extremes of several categories.

96

Figure 7.2 Average energy requirements for various consumption categories within the European Union and the extremes found in this study. Energy req (GJ/y) 80 SPA 70

60

50 DEN MIN 40

AVERAGE MAX ITA

30

SWE DEN

20

POR

SWE

POR

10

ITA

GRE

NL ITA DEN

NL

POR GRE

0 food beverages

housing

recreation

transport

furnishing

hotels

clothing

misc

Differences between the total energy requirements of households in different countries are due mainly to (A) differences between total household expenditure and (B) differences between households’ direct energy requirements. The expenditures on direct energy are strongly related to climate (Nordic countries require more heat to keep warm, for detailed discussion on this see source 7.3), this climate effect must be excluded since no information on lifestyles can be obtained from this. With respect to consumption patterns, it may be concluded that the pattern of Dutch households is not an extreme within Europe. Less money is spend on food and housing than the EU average and more on recreation (and on direct energy, but this is a result of climate).

7.3.2 Comparison using input/output methodology Method and data The input/output energy analysis originates from economics. I/O analysis assumes that monetary transactions given in input/output tables are proportional to physical transactions; more information on the method used can be found in source 7.2. 97

Input/output-analysis studies energy use in society at a higher level of scale than the method used in the previous paragraph. The information obtained is less detailed, but since the method is less laborious, production energy intensities in other countries can be determined. (Dutch intensities were used in the previous paragraph, since determining other countries’ energy intensities at the detailed level required for that study was not possible within the scope of the project). The I/O analysis applied is described in Chapter 5. Detailed description of the method applied in this context is contained in the original publication cited in source 7.4. For each country, production sectors’ energy intensities were calculated, combination with consumption data results in the household energy requirements. For each country, household energy requirements were determined and compared with energy requirements of Dutch households. Differences in direct and indirect energy requirements are explained separately. In order to be able to apply the above-mentioned methodology, various countries’ input-output tables are required and these tables must have a similar structure. This boundary condition limited the number of countries that could be studied. These tables were available only for Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, Italy and the UK; and concern data for 1985. Before this information could be used, some necessary adaptations were required (see source 7.4).

Results Figure 7.3 shows the direct and indirect energy use of households in the countries studied. Energy use of households is greatest in Germany and the United Kingdom. This is due to the number of households in these countries. The data per household presented in figure 7.4 shows that the energy use is of a similar order per household. Again, large differences were found between countries’ shares of direct energy use in the total (southern countries show the smallest share). This is in accordance with data presented in the previous paragraphs. In addition, it is likely that the climate is the

98

Figure 7.3 Direct and indirect energy requirements of households in seven EU member states (source 7.4).

5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 ger

den

spa

indirect

fra

ita

uk

net(87)

direct

main course. However, Denmark and Germany show a different pattern than the Netherlands and this cannot be explained by major differences in climate. Closer examination of the results showed that the energy efficiency of the energy sectors was the main cause for the differences found (source 7.4). The energy efficiency of Dutch energy sectors is relative high, while efficiency of Danish and German sectors is relative low. (For further discussion on this point, refer to source 7.4). Figure 7.4 also shows that, for all countries considered, indirect energy requirements per household are lower than that of Dutch households. This high indirect energy requirement of Dutch households was analysed further. It turned out that energy intensities of Dutch production sectors are on average higher than production sectors in other countries. Energy intensities of Dutch agriculture and industry are especially higher. Further differences in consumption volume were also found. Volume of household consumption in France is more than 16% higher than that that of the Netherlands. On the other hand, household consumption in the UK is about 15% lower. To analyse the consumption effect (the composition of the consumption package), the Dutch volume data and intensities were combined with the structure data from the individual countries.

99

Figure 7.4 Direct and indirect energy requirements per household in seven EU member states (source 7.4).

200

150

100

50

0 ger

den

spa

fra

indirect

ita

uk

net(87)

direct

Figure 7.5 shows these results. Large differences between countries were found. A Spanish household spends relative large amount of money for trade repair and lodging and for food; a Dutch households spends relative small amounts of money on food and the Italian and German households a relative large amount on clothing. Figure 7.5 Indirect energy requirements of expenditures on main consumption categories per country calculated on basis of country structure and Dutch volume and energy intensities (source 7.4). Energy req. (GJ) 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 GER food products

100

DEN clothing

SPA

FRA

other products

ITA

UK

trade, repair, lodging

NET(87) other services

The energy requirements for food are analysed further in Figure 7.6 and show that meat consumption is the main cause for the differences found.

Figure 7.6 Indirect energy requirements of expenditures on food products per country calculated on basis of country structure and Dutch volume and energy intensities (source 7.4). Energy req.(GJ) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 GER

agricultural prod.

7.3.3

DEN

meat and meat prod.

SPA

FRA

milk and dairy prod.

ITA

other food prod.

UK

NET(87)

beverages, tobacco

Concluding remarks with respect to the international comparison

The countries evaluated in the studies reported above are not the same. This is due to the fact that the availability of data determined the choice of the countries studied. Only Spain, Italy, Denmark and the Netherlands were evaluated in both studies. Another important difference is the year the data were used from. The budget study includes data from 1994, while the input/output study involved data from 1985. Both studies used the most recent data available. The results obtained in both methods differ. In source 7.2 is shown that when both methods are applied to the same country, the results found can be different. Both studies show that countries in northern Europe use more direct energy than indirect, while in the south it is the other way round. This is due to differences in climate. Furthermore, it is shown that production energy intensities differ between countries, energy production sectors are more efficient in the Netherlands, but the rest of the production sectors are more energy intensive than in the other European countries. This implies that results found in the budget

101

comparison study should be used with great care, since, in that study, energy intensities of Dutch production systems were used; in the other study, it was shown that major differences exist in these energy intensities. The results of the budget study should be interpreted as: what would be the energy requirement when the present Dutch population changed to a Spanish consumption pattern and not as an estimation of the energy requirements of the Spanish households. In general, it can be concluded that the energy requirements of the Dutch consumption pattern are relatively low in comparison with the other European countries. Spending on food and clothing is smaller than in the rest of Europe. This implies that within these categories not many reduction options can be found abroad since the neighbours consume more.

7.4

Comparison with results from other Dutch research projects

Reduction of direct and indirect household energy-consumption and the broader context of shifting household practices towards sustainability have also been the subject of other Dutch research projects. The three relevant projects here are the Perspective project, the HOMES project and the SusHouse project. We offer a short discussion on the approaches followed in these projects and their results. Finally, we compare to the main conclusion of the GreenHouse project with these findings.

7.4.1 Perspective project The Perspective project performed a practical study on the possibility reducing energy consumption through information-induced behavioural change of consumption patterns (see Schmidt and Postma, 1999). Twelve households participated in a twoyear field experiment. Their target was to reduce direct and indirect energy consumption by 40%, notwithstanding the given 20% rise in income - an award for meeting the reduction target. Households had to fill in weekly lists concerning their energy use and shopping practice and received direct feedback through informative software on the energy consequences of their behaviour. Additionally, tutors heavily counselled the households during the experiment. Households almost succeeded in meeting the 40% reduction target. The largest part of the reduction was related to the indirect energy requirements. The direct energy requirements were reduced by energy saving behaviour and by replacing old 102

appliances with more energy-efficient ones. Important changes observed in consumption behaviour were: -

Increased purchase of high priced labour-intensive goods (designer goods, handmade goods and works of art).

-

Increased purchase of high quality an durable goods (cloths, shoes and furniture) and extension of the lifetime by repair.

-

Alternation of diet (less meat, biologically produced food, seasonal vegetables instead of vegetables produced in greenhouses).

-

Changes in the mobility pattern including travel reduction (short distance holiday locations and cycling for commuting).

-

Increased purchases of services (domestic help, visiting restaurants, education and beauty services).

Generally, lifestyle changes due to this experiment were valued positively. The purchase of high quality goods and personal services formed a very attractive ingredient of the new lifestyle. The participants were initially burdened with constantly required attention to energy during shopping, however, became accustomed to this aspect of the experiment later. The restriction of mobility was negatively considered during the entire experimental period.

The lifestyle of the participants was also analysed one and half year after the experimental period in a follow-up survey. Changes in diet were partly to almost fully sustained. Changes regarding purchases of high quality goods and personal services were partly sustained. Changes regarding transportation and holidays were abandoned for the most part. In addition, the direct energy consumption was moderately increased. Two setbacks can explain these results. The discontinuation of the financial contribution limited the possibility of spending money on quality goods and services. The discontinuation of control and feedback diminished the pressure of maintaining the discipline required for adherence to an energy-saving lifestyle. The participants gladly switched back to an intensive mobility pattern after the experimental period. The Perspective project demonstrates the applicability (supported by information and weekly feedback) and acceptability (with an incentive structure) of a low energydemanding consumption pattern. It is also interesting that a significant part of the 103

behavioural change appears to be permanent after the removal of the feedback and incentive structure. Apparently structural change in household behaviour has been effected during the two-year period.

7.4.2 HOMES-project The HOMES-project (Noorman & Schoot Uiterkamp, 1998) addressed the issue of sustainable household metabolism. This issue was elaborated in some parts of the household consumption pattern: space and water heating, the acquisition and use of (electricity demanding) appliances and transport. A multidisciplinary perspective was followed,

including

social-psychological,

spatial

planning,

policy

and

energy/environmental analysis. From each of the disciplinary perspectives, a view is given about the possibilities and constraints of realising a more sustainable household consumption pattern. Some important findings are presented below. The energy analysis was mainly directed at direct household energy use. A scenario approach demonstrates a 40% reduction possibility of direct household energy requirements in the Towards Sustainability scenario, and a 10% increase of direct household energy requirement in the Business As Usual scenario (Van der Wal & Moll, 2001). The social psychology analysis demonstrates, by applying a survey, that individual respondents may accept moderate reductions (10% - 15%) of their total energy requirements in order to achieve a more sustainable society. Respondents also believe that reductions of up to approx. 25% will not have major effects on their quality of life (Gatersleben, 2001). The spatial planning analysis addresses the relationship between form of urbanisation and household energy requirements. It appeared that position of the urban centre in its surrounding is an important determinant for the household’s mobility practices. For a regional capital within a largely rural area, compact urban development demonstrates the emergence of favourable mobility patterns. In other areas with that already have high-density urban centres (the so-called urban fields), new compactly build urban areas will stimulate mobility because of the large diversity of spatial relations in that case (van Diepen, 2000). The policy analysis addresses the issue of steering households toward a more sustainable consumption pattern. Here, the production-consumption chain is also very 104

important. All actors (producers, retailers, consumers) in that chain should be targeted. To steer producers and other economic actors is easier than steering the consumer, because of the large diversity of that group and also because of the great distance of government from the consumers. To steer consumers effectively, indirect mechanisms (through economic actors) and unilateral mechanisms (taxation and information) are advised (Ligteringen, 1999).

7.4.3 SusHouse project The SusHouse project analysed long-term feasibility of sustainable household practices (on food, see Quist, 2000, Dekker 1999). For some important household activities, potentially sustainable pictures were derived based on mixed forecasting and back casting approach. The forecasting process identified some major economic and social-cultural trends for some household activities. Based on these trends some long-term pictures were constructed. In the second stage, the consistency of these pictures with sustainability goals was analysed, aiming at assessing crucial social and technical conditions necessary to meet the sustainability goals within these pictures. The third ‘backcasting’ stage should explore ways to reach a future state, from the present state, in accordance with the sustainable pictures found. The SusHouse project derived three strongly different pictures: the intelligent kitchen, the superrant and local food production. Acceleration and intelligent high-technology cooking: households are characterised by high-tech, convenience, do it yourself, moderate use of services and acceleration of life, and especially so during the working week. There are no fixed meal times par se, but meal periods, during which one can have meals depending on working hours and leisure activities. Environmental gains arise from this system because of optimisation of household management and the use of sustainable ingredients. The neighbourhood food centre (named superant). In a compact city one can go to centres for having one’s meals, grocery shopping, purchasing take-away meals and eating together for different prices. This neighbourhood food and eat centre is visited by a large variation of households including single people, families and elderly people. Environmental benefits stem from local-up scaling, sustainably grown foods and increasing the service component.

105

Local green menu through green consumer demand. Households buy and eat seasonal food grown locally and purchased at local shops, small supermarkets and from the grower as ‘fresh’ unprocessed ingredients. Imported products are expensive due to the incorporation of environmental costs. The coupling between food and origin is enhanced and cooking is done in the kitchen at home. Environmental benefits arise from sustainable, seasonal and locally grown foods, accompanied by the minimisation of transportation and processing. Confronting these pictures with sustainability goals, for instance, with regard to greenhouse gas emissions, each picture has large difficulties in meeting these goals; and far-reaching additional assumptions are required, for instance, for efficiency of appliances and transport in the first two pictures and with regard to the personal diet in the third picture.

7.4.4 Concluding remarks Comparing the results of these projects with the findings in the GreenHouse project, the following remarks may be made. All the projects demonstrate the possibility of reducing the total household energy requirement. The reduction percentages found are in the same order of magnitude as in the GreenHouse project. The Perspective project also demonstrates the acceptability of low-energy household consumption patterns under very specific conditions. This result also corresponds with the findings of the Ecoteams, where substantial reductions are possible within a year and behaviour permanence is also demonstrated. We should realise that these conditions are not generally applicable to the average household. These approaches demonstrate the value of a targeted approach towards single households. In the social psychology analysis of the HOMES project, higher acceptance rates of reduction options are found than in the GreenHouse project. This difference can be explained with help of the differences in the social psychology research approach and the household study approach. In social psychology, attitudes are measured when respondents are asked about the acceptability of reduction options achievable in the future. Generally, attitudes are an imperfect predictor of future behaviour. In the household study approach, the respondents were asked to imagine the daily consequences of accepting an option and thinking about constraints. Opinions are also 106

based on the practical implications of reduction options. Therefore, we consider the household study findings realistic for the near future. The SusHouse project analyses the household functioning and potential for change at the level of the activity categories, just like in the GreenHouse project. An interesting aspect of this project is the long-term directed and holistic scenarios approach followed. It would be interesting to survey the households’ opinions on achievability and acceptability of these designed scenarios. The strongly accepted options or strongly rejected options concerning direct energy requirements are roughly the same in these projects as well as in the GreenHouse project. Energy efficient appliances and lighting are appreciated; and reductions with regard to mobility are heavily discarded. It was also found in all studies that many people are inclined to reduce the use of appliances, but are averse to reducing the number of appliances present in the household. The comparison of results concerning indirect energy requirement does not result in a clear picture. The concept of indirect energy is not yet widely understood by society. Thus, the information given to households in a project will heavily influence participants’ opinion and behaviour in a survey. Different research conditions with regard to information in the projects considered will thus impede drawing solid comparative results. We may conclude from these comparisons that the results found in the GreenHouse project pertaining to reduction potentials and acceptance of reduction options by households, are consistent with the results of the other projects considered. These projects indicate too, the importance of information and feedback in achieving energy-reducing consumption patterns. Another important conclusion is the importance of indirect policies and strategies in order to realise energy conservation on the household level. We observe that application of the household study approach within the context of households’ energy reduction led to new insights concerning the feasibility of changes and possibilities of improving acceptance of changes within the household.

107

7.4.5 Literature referred in paragraph 7.4 Dekker. C.P., (1999) Consumer acceptance of future scenarios in food-consumption: an explorative research. Wageningen: Agricultural University Wageningen, Household and Consumer Studies. Diepen, A.M.L. van, (2000) Households and their spatial-energetic practices. Searching for sustainable urban forms. Groningen: University of Groningen Ph. D. Thesis. Gatersleben, B., (2001) Sustainable household consumption and the quality of life: the acceptability of sustainable consumption patterns and consumer policy strategies. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, Vol. 14, pp. 200216. Ligteringen, J.J., (1999) The feasibility of Dutch policy instruments. Ph. D. thesis, Twenthe University Press. Noorman, K.J. and T. Schoot Uiterkamp, (1998) Green Households? Domestic consumers, environment and sustainability. London: Earthscan Publications. Quist, J., (2000) Duurzaam voeden in het huishouden. Toekomstbeelden & Analyseresultaten. Documenten t.b.v. Workshop Implementatie. T.U. Delft Rescon, (2000) Het perspectief project 1½ jaar later. De stand van zaken bij 11 huishoudens. Haarlem: Rescon. Schmidt, T. and A.D. Postma, (1999) Minder energiegebruik door een andere leefstijl? Project Perspectief Eindrapportage. The Hague: Ministry of VROM (Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment). Wal, J. van der and H.C. Moll, (2001) Towards sustainable household energy use in the Netherlands. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, Vol. 14, pp. 217-230.

108

7.5

Project publications used as basis for this chapter

Source 7.1 Reinders, A.H.M.E and K. Blok, (1999) Non-Co2 greenhouse gas emissions resulting form 4 selected products used by households in The Netherlands. NW&S Report 99070. Utrecht: Utrecht University.

Source 7.2 Wilting, H.C. (1996) An energy perspective on economic activities. PHD-Thesis Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen.

Source 7.3 Reinders, A.H.M.E, K. Vringer and K. Blok (1999) The direct and indirect energy requirement of households in the European Union in 1994. NW&S Report 99019. Utrecht: Utrecht University.

Source 7.4 Wilting, H.C, H.C Moll and S. Nonhebel, (1999) Direct and indirect energy use of European households. IVEM report. Groningen: University of Groningen.

109

110

8.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1

Introduction

In this concluding chapter, we shall evaluate the practical project findings discussed in Chapters 3 through 7, in the context of the overall project goal in order to offer integrated assessment of the possibilities of reducing GHG emissions by changes in household consumption patterns. The household studies theoretical approach is used here to explain the discrepancy between the high potential found, and the low feasibility of the acceptance, of options by present-day households. The implications for the general policy objective of reducing nationwide GHG emissions are discussed and some drivers are identified to improve the implementation of GHG emissionreducing options. Based on this final integrative analysis, recommendations are derived to increase the possibilities of Dutch GHG emission-reduction in the future.

8.2

Discussion of main project findings

This project attempts to determine the potential for GHG emissions by changes in household consumption patterns. To identify this potential, the project identified a large variety of reduction options. A set of roughly one hundred options is given specific consideration. Most of these are of minor importance individually, effecting 0.1% - 1% reduction of total household energy requirements. The options considered range from buying energy-saving light bulbs to eating less meat or buying other types of presents. These options address all relevant energy parts of present-day household consumption; and are directed at a very large part of the total household energy requirements (estimate to be above 80%). The overall reduction-potential calculated from these demand-side options is slightly above 25% of household energy requirements. Household energy requirement can also be reduced by supply-side measures (in agriculture, industry and service sectors). The overall reduction potential of the considered set of supply-side options is about 30% of household energy requirement. Combining supply-side and demand-side options in the calculation model, household total energy requirement decreases more than 50%. This assumes a constant level of household spending in these calculations. 111

Thus, we see a substantial reduction potential for GHG emissions through changes in household consumption patterns. It is remarkable that the reduction potential on the demand-side has the same order of magnitude as that of the supply. Interpreting these findings, we should realise that the present situation is taken as the basis of this analysis. Thus, only options that are realistic under present conditions are taken into account (considering present prices and incomes, present available infrastructure, present supply of products, present production methods, and presently demonstrated household practices). The results can be interpreted to be an overview about the possible reduction options for households, given the present situation and the effects on GHG emissions when these options are monetarily incorporated. We should also realise that these findings are mainly based on the application of energy analysis methodology; and that results of household studies analysis on the possibilities of a full implementation of the total set of options is not included in the percentages mentioned above.

Households studies surveys investigate the feasibility of large-scale acceptance of the identified options. The options used in the surveys are designed is such way that their impact on households practices should be limited (instead of changing to a complete vegetarian diet, eating a vegetarian meal once a week is suggested; and instead of not using a car at all, driving less is offered as an alternative option). These surveys found that none of the options scores high levels of acceptance. Some options receive moderate acceptance scores, and the other low acceptance scores. The highest scores of acceptance are at a level of 30%. The options with a moderate acceptance level demonstrate some common characteristics; they increase the energetic efficiency (through modified appliances and lightning systems) and their implementation has few behavioural effects; or they intensify behaviour already present in the household (eating one more vegetarian meal per week in households which have already adopted a partly vegetarian diet). Important options with a (very) low acceptance level concern shifts in the mobility pattern or the abandonment of appliances, which already present in the household. Households vary substantially in their activity patterns used to fulfil basic needs. Many options are therefore only relevant to a small minority of the households. Scarcity of resources, or the lack of relevant facilities within a specific household, 112

impedes the effective implementation of options in many cases. In addition, lack of information and absence of relevant knowledge was found, primarily with regard to indirect energy embodied in products, which impede the households in making wellfounded choices from an energy-reduction perspective. These findings imply that the current reduction of GHG emissions, as a result of changing consumption patterns, lies in order of magnitude of 5% (assuming that when households mention that they are accepting some options, then they will definitely implement these).

8.3

Explanation of the current low acceptance of GHG-emission reduction options by households

The discrepancy between the necessary substantial potential calculated for reducing GHG emissions by implementing all options, the low feasibility of general acceptance of these options in the household sector and the corresponding low reduction results beg closer examination. The understanding of this discrepancy may generate insights into how the household sector may achieve reductions that are more substantial. The basic concepts of the Household Studies discipline offer an explanatory framework. The ultimate goal of a household is to organise its practices and use the available resources so that the level of living achieved within the household meets the standard of living acquired by that household. Households differ with respect to the standard of living they have acquired. The standard of living of a household is determined by many factors inside that household such as attitudes and opinions of household members, the availability of household resources and by many factors outside the households such as the social-cultural norms in the society and the availability and accessibility of facilities (such as child care) and of infrastructure (such as transportation). The present behaviour of a household is determined by the tendency to apply the available household resources for the attainment of the actual standard of living at an optimal rate. Lack of acceptance for household’s behavioural-change requested for environmental reasons should not be interpreted as a capricious, indolent or stubborn rejection of necessary transformation; that should be interpreted as a source of conflict with the current household strategy to meet its standard of living. 113

The adoption of environmentally friendly behaviour generally fits with the social norm in conserving the quality of environmental systems in order to guarantee the liveability of the world for present and future generations. However, this socially accepted environmental norm competes with many other social cultural norms, which are deeply rooted in society. In other words, GHG emission-reduction options, which imply increases in labour within the household or a decrease in the efficiency of household organisation, conflict with the general trend of labour saving and efficiency increases in society; and with the high emphasis on maintaining enough time for leisure, sport and personal development. Options that restrict mobility and holidays patterns results in another type of conflict. Current social norms regarding mobility, also embedded in present-day infrastructure, is the free availability auto-mobility, and the norms concerning holidays, also supported by aviation tariffs, is the expansion of the personal horizon to a global level. Therefore, we can understand the low acceptance of the ‘mobility and holiday’ options in the research. In these cases, social norms concerning mobility and holidays totally dominate the environmental norm. Within the household, potential conflicts between social norms and available household resources have been solved through the acquisition of appliances, saving time or enabling a more efficient household organisation. For instance, the presentday norm of clothing (of wearing clean cloths to work every day and diversity of clothing during the week and sometimes even during the day) results in many washing cycles and requires a short turnover time for drying, ironing and so forth. The use of the tumble dryer creates the opportunity to combine the clothing norms with the necessity of an efficient household organisation. The tumble dryer compensates for the lack of space for cloths-line drying or lack of time. For households that possess a tumble dryer, this appliance has become an essential tool in their household management. Therefore, we can understand that reduction options requiring the abandonment of appliances are not easily accepted. Two types of options show a moderate acceptance level. We can explain this based on their effects on the standard of living. The first type concern options that increase the energetic efficiency (appliances and lightning systems). These options require some investments, but may create also future earnings and their implementation bears no effects on other household resources. Households without scarcity of financial resources can adopt these easily; and may furthermore be motivated in this direction 114

by current information campaigns depicting such appliances and light bulbs as environmental friendly. The second type, concern option-intensifying behaviour that is already present in the household, such as eating more vegetarian meals in households that have already adopted a partly vegetarian diet; and reducing the use of a tumble dryer by households that already use their dryer selectively. In these households, the reduction behaviour to be stimulated is already partly present, so these households consider such behaviour as not conflicting with their standard of living. They consider eating less meat as eating healthy or they like outside dried cloths. Stressing the environmental importance of a vegetarian diet or the reduced use of an tumble dryer appeals to the social norms congruent to environmental conservation and may induce increased adoption of such behaviour by these households. In the households study survey a large variety of household behaviour patterns is found. An average household is non-existent. The consequence of this diversity is that many options that are relevant at the household average level are not applicable in a substantial subset of households. This observation explains also, why none of the options could acquire a high level of acceptance.

8.4

Implications relevant for national GHG-emission reduction aims

Although there is a large potential for the reduction of nationwide GHG emissions through supply-side and demand-side changes concerning household consumption it is unlikely that an absolute reduction of these emissions will be obtained through these routes in the coming decade. In the first place, we observe that the approx. 50% reduction calculated is just enough to compensate for the increase of the consumption by population growth and by economic growth. The consumption of the household sector has increased since 1990 and is likely to rise in future decades. This increase in consumption will lead to an increase in GHG emissions. When an average economic growth of 2 % per year is assumed over the period 1990 to 2020, the implementation of all options suggested here are just enough to compensate the effects of the consumption growth; and no net reduction of the emissions shall be achieved. (In source 8.1, several scenarios for growth and their effects on the emissions are discussed in more detail). In the second 115

place, we have found that households do not intend to adopt most of the reduction options under present circumstances. In addition, the full realisation of the supply-side options is questionable. For the fulfilment of international commitments with respect to GHG emissions, it remains necessary to substantially reduce GHG emissions related to household consumption. This implies that the limitations of implementing options have to be addressed in a fundamental way.

The energy analytical base of this project is founded on the assumption that all energy consumption and GHG emissions related to the goods and services purchased by households should be attributed to the household sector, in addition to the energy used directly in the households (see Chapter 1). This assumption does not imply that households are fully responsible for the total energy requirements related to household consumption, and that the household should carry the full burden of reducing energy use and GHG emissions. In this project, the importance of the supply-side is already demonstrated (see Chapter 5). The household analysis approach indicates other drivers for reduction, based on influencing the availability of household resources and the current standard of living of households. Therefore, we can specify the potential drivers and related responsible actors for realising reductions. The production sectors including the energy production are important in two ways: first, they should reduce the fossil fuel energy-consumption in their plants and they should deliver products to the households that are durable and efficient in direct energy use. For both approaches, a substantial reduction potential is identified. The producers and the government - for standard setting - are the most responsible actors. The relevant household-resources are information and knowledge, time, money and some general skills required to manage a household. Knowledge is required concerning the environmental impact of consumption in order to be able to make responsible choices. Project results demonstrate that this knowledge is largely lacking, especially with regard to indirect energy. Some options addressed in previous ‘save energy’ campaigns are yet to be recognised as a possibility for lowering household energy requirements. The education system, consumer organisations and the energy companies are responsible actors. 116

Scarcity of time or money impedes many households in diminishing the use of energy-demanding and time-saving appliances or to invest in less energy-demanding appliances. Provision of resources, especially the most limiting for a specific household, may facilitate the adoption of GHG emission-reducing options. The government and labour organisations are the responsible actors. The physical infrastructure (the houses, their surroundings, the roads and the distances to and from the workplace and important facility centres) and the institutional infrastructure (the accessibility of facilities and the availability of services) surrounding a household exert strong influence on the management of household resources and on household behaviour with regard to mobility and leisure time. This influence may be used in cases of expansion or restructuring of infrastructure to facilitate GHG emission-reducing behavioural change within and outside the households. The most important responsible actors are the local authorities and institutions. National government can set additional standards for local authorities with regard to the development of infrastructure contribution to GHG emissionreductions such as low access and speed limits for cars and extra facilities for cycling and walking in dwelling and shopping areas. The aggregate of the current social cultural norms within the society do not favour GHG emissions-reducing consumption patterns. The norms regarding environmental conservation lose the competition with many other norms resulting in an expansion of energy consuming and GHG-emitting behaviour. Also the government shows this ambiguous pattern: the department of environmental affairs have to compete with the department of economic affairs (favouring annually economic growth rates of 3%), with the department of traffic planning (that recently rejected the objective of moderating the growth of car mobility) and the department of spatial and housing planning (that expands the housing stock and the average space consumption per house). Change of social norms will be an important driver for GHG-emission reductions. However, a strategy to change social norms is not simply implemented. We may speculate on this. Many actors should play a role. However, the role of government seems crucial here; firstly, to change its ambiguous attitude to a consistent and goal-directed strategy, aiming toward GHG emission-reductions; and secondly, to inform, stimulate and facilitate other actors participating in the formation and development of social and cultural norms, such as education, social community 117

work in order get broader social acceptance of behavioural patterns, reducing the energy requirements and associated GHG emissions.

8.5

Recommendations

Which policy recommendations can be derived that will bring about a decline of household related greenhouse gas emissions? The drivers discussed above enable us to speculate on a successful policy strategy aiming at substantial reduction of GHG emissions related household consumption. In the short term, it is very important to reduce indirect emissions related to consumer goods by increasing efficiency in the production of goods and the delivery of services. For the medium term, it also important to substantially raise, as soon as possible, the average energy efficiency of durable consumer goods acquired by the consumer in replacing obsolete ones (freezers, dryers, cars and so on). The acceptability of these options is high, but the slow turnover of these goods will produce, even with substantial efficiency increase, a slow but continuing decrease of the related average energy use. Both strategies pursued may consequently bend the probable rising trend for total household energy requirements in the first decade of the 21st century. However, it will be necessary to deal with the other drivers to get better and long lasting results with regard to future GHG emissions-reduction. Tackling these issues should also start soon, although a substantial span of time will be required to observe the results. For the improvement of the knowledge, including feedback on behavioural change, it is very important to disseminate information about the amounts and consequences of GHG emissions and the effects of household consumption on these emissions. In this way, information barriers should be removed and reduction changes should be stimulated, which do not conflict with the current standard of living and therefore instantaneously achievable within the households concerned. In addition, the Perspective project demonstrates the importance of information and feedback to achieve reductions. General campaigns, for instance, directed on food consumption and energy saving practices for the use of appliances may be of importance. A wellexplained environmental labelling scheme (e.g. lifecycle energy requirement and emissions) and other information methods may reach the consumer at the very 118

moment of the acquisition of goods. The spread of interactive software, through which the consumers can orient themselves on the GHG emission-reduction effects by changed consumption patterns may produce the required feedback and may induce further change in the consumption pattern. The provision of a resource, being presently most scarce within a specific household type, may increase the potential for the adoption of reduction options. In many households with children, time seems to be the scarcest resource. In households with low incomes, lack of money constrains the possibility of investing in energy-efficient appliances and to buy environmentally-friendly goods. A general diminishment in hours worked per week, and specific facilities such as extended parental leave for households with children, may mitigate the scarcity of time. A lease scheme or subsidies for energy efficient appliances may speed the introduction of such appliances in households. In some cases, the resource knowledge is defective in providing the knowledge on how to perform household tasks (e.g. cloth washing and maintenance) and how to organise the household efficiently. Attention on teaching these skills is presently insufficient in secondary school education. More educational attention on these important aspects of life, also for the environment in general, may mitigate the time-pressure on households and increase the performance concerning the quality of life. The present physical and social infrastructure exerts a substantial influence on household behaviour and severely limits the feasibility of some reduction options. Traffic safety (for children going to school and other activities), car-free and limitedaccess zones in build up environments, the presence of regular public transport, restricted availability of parking space near houses and working places all determine the attractiveness of a low-energy mobility pattern. The availability of schools, shops, services, sport and recreational facilities close to households may substantially reduce time spent on the related activities and may mitigate the time-pressure on households. Institutional arrangements for car-sharing, local children crèches, collective cooking and non-monetary exchange of services may facilitate households generally as well as introduce energy reducing practices. The potential influence of physical and socialinfrastructure change is enormous on household behaviour and on the related energy requirements and greenhouse gas emissions. It is important to integrate the evaluation, of the effects on household’s behaviour and consumption, in the planning procedure 119

for infrastructure extensions and change. Also it is recommended to stimulate processes creating institutions providing and facilitating local services in neighbourhoods, for instance, organising the sharing of appliances, collective cooking and growing organic food. To effect a change of the social and cultural norms, which presently limit the implementation of GHG emission-reducing consumption patterns, is not feasible on a short-term basis, although necessary to achieve the required reduction of national GHG emissions. It is important and possible to work intentionally on such changes on the longer term. The government as caretaker of the general and long-term interests plays a crucial role. Therefore, the government should define a consistent long-term approach for handling future GHG emissions. Essential for such an approach is a clear definition of the role and the responsibilities of all responsible actors, including households. The government should also demonstrate a deliberate and definite commitment to achieving the goals set and should operate accordingly towards all relevant actors. Such a governmental attitude will contribute to alternations of social cultural norms and will also generate a societal backbone for acceptance of many measures discussed earlier in this section.

8.6

Close

A massive amount of knowledge has been gathered from integrated environmental and household scientific perspectives concerning the possibilities and constraints of reducing the total energy requirements and households’ greenhouse gas emissions. We found a large potential for reducing energy requirement and emissions. Presently, only a modest part of the reduction potential is feasible, due to the low acceptance of the reduction options by households themselves.

8.7

Project publications referred to in this chapter

Source 8.1 Wilting, H.C., H.C Moll and S. Nonhebel, (1999) An integrative Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Options. IVEM Research Report 101. Groningen: Centre for Energy and Environmental Studies, University of Groningen. 120

APPENDIX 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Rationale Changes in consumer behaviour, often reffered to as “lifestyle” changes, are generally considered to be one of the powerful options to reduce energy consumption and the associated emission of greenhouse gases. These changes not only include changes that affect the direct energy consumption of househoulds (electricity, natural gas, gasoline, etc) but also changes that affect the indirect energy consumption, i.e. the energy that is embodied in goods and sevices that are purchased by households. Under the NRP-1 research programme IVEM-RUG and STS-UU have carried out a study in which both parts are shown to be more or less of equal importance [1], a result that most probably holds for most OECD countries. Up to now IVEM-RUG and STS-UU have been involved as partners in research projects aiming at the development of a method that can be used to determine the direct and indirect energy requirements associated with consumer expenditures. This method combines (physical-chemical) process analysis and (economical) input-output analysis in order to be fast and relatively accurate [2,3]. This method has been applied successfully to determine the energy requirements associated with 350 consumption categories, covering most of the household expenditure categories [4,5,6,7]. The resulting data set has been made available through the EAP computer program that was developed under NRP-funding for analysis and storage of the relevant data [8]. Interesting differences between and within the main consumption categories have shown up [1,9]. On the basis of these data the total direct and indirect energy requirements of households in the Netherlands were calculated, and the influence of the main determining variables, like income, was established [1]. Furthermore, an analysis has been made of the historical trends in energy intensity (1969-1988) and in budget spending [10]. An attempt has also been made to connect the differences in consumption patterns to ‘lifestyle’concepts, but this turned out not to be fruitful up to now [11].

Now that the feasibility of the method for analysing the energy requirement of consumer products has been firmly established, the next step in the research programme is outlined in this proposal. The studies executed so far mainly concern

121

observations of the past and the present consumption patterns of households with only a limited attempt to extrapolate results into the future [12]. The analysis focused on individual products, which excludes the interrelation between the uses of many products. Furthermore, it was especially directed on the Dutch situation, which questions the validity of the results for other countries. Thus, this proposal focuses on the analysis of future options for the reduction of energy requirements and thereby of GHG emissions by changes in consumption patterns. So, where the NRP-1 project focused on understanding the status quo, this proposed follow-up will focus on the feasibility of change. Three research lines will be followed: a.

The possibilities and energy/GHG effects of shifts in consumption patterns will be analysed on a functional and on the household level (rather than on the product level) including the constraints that may be posed by these changes in the utilisation of household resources. This higher aggregation level is needed as shifts in consumption patterns generally influence the consumption of a range of products.

b.

The influences of changes in household consumption patterns on the rest of the economy (services and industry) will be studied as well as the effect of (efficiency) changes in the latter sectors on the energy intensity of household consumption.

c.

The validity of the results for other countries will be studied.

This will generate useful insights for the subsequent formulation of public policy and for implementation in the different institutions that are interacting with households (like public utilities). Another extension compared to the NRP-1 project is that attention will be paid to the effect of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. The evaluation of consumption options can turn out to be quite different from the energy/ CO2 perspective than from the all-GHG perspective. An example is the choice between woollen carpets and polyamide carpets [13].

The next research step consists of an analysis of three coupled issues: a. The aim of households is to satisfy functional needs like to be fed, to be housed, to be clothed, to supply personal care/sanitation and to enable leisure activities. These can be covered by a package of related consumption items. Often different packages 122

are able to fulfil the same need. There are substantial differences between types of households in the energy and material requirements for the same function [14,15]. For this reason this project proposal firstly focuses on the analysis at this functional level of (changes in) consumption patterns that result from introduction of technical energy saving options. This has e.g. been done before by HCS-WAU in an investigation for an energy distributing company (PNEM). In that project the actual water consumption (rate) has been measured in bathrooms of private households with and without a water saving shower head [16,17]. Examples of such changes that will be studied at the functional level are: making the least energy-intensive choice of material of which products are made, a shift to purchase of goods with higher quality, a shift to a higher service-component in purchases, a shift to goods with a higher energy and material efficiency, a shift of domestic functions to external institutional services, etc. A preliminary evaluation has shown that by such shifts substantial reductions in the indirect energy intensity of household consumption categories (e.g. 30%) can be achieved [12]. This part of the research program deals with the following issues: a1)

The formulation of an integrated context (resulting from inputs from the three cooperating institutes) capitalising on the available knowledge of household spending and of the available knowledge of the industrial metabolism (through I/O analysis). Within this context the final choices for the functional analysis must be made. The execution of the functional analyes outlined above within different subprojects to be carried out in the participating institutes.

a2)

Analytical research of reduction options at the functional level with a focus on food handling, domestic decoration, clothing and leisure

a3)

Field research with regard to household processes relatd to these functions and options in order to identify the required household resources and trade-offs between different household resources.

Thus, the analysis not only concerns the evalutation of separate functions, but also the evaluation of the processes in which products, appliances or services are used. This is necessary in order to identify at the level of households the required complementary resources (like time, energy/labour, materials, money etc.) and to establish the effects of changes in these items on the functional performance of the process (comfort, safety, well-being). Household resources are to a certain extent interchangeable . The 123

use of a given resource for one function may therefore limit the use for other functions. So interactions between functions and cumulative effects of changes have to be taken into account on the level of households. All these factors will be of significant importance for the (changes in) behaviour of people. The importance of this kind of research has been stressed by e.g. the RMNO [18]. Only few research groups focus on the behaviour of consumers in relation to their social and physical environment. Field research thus constitutes an integral part of the present proposal.

b. The effects of changes in household behaviour will be assessed from the national (macro) perspective due to the fact that the combined effects of changes in technology and in household consumption patterns may result in significant changes in the production structure and the exports and imports. The consequences in terms of changes in GHG emissions will also be evaluated. The required analyses are made from two perspectives: *

The meso perspective by studying the changes that occur by adjusting key parameters (process parameters, structural changes) in the EAP computer program and associated data bases, thereby reflecting the consequences for the energy intensities of household budget spending items, and

*

The macro perspective by studying the changes that follow from structural changes in the economy (industry and service sector) and that have consequences for the energy intensities of household items. This will be studied by means of economical and energy I/O analysis conform the methodology developed under the NRP-1 program.

c. In a few other countries comparable research is under way. For a group of OECDEurope countries data are available that will allow comparisons at an international level and will generate useful insights into the contrasts. The same holds for the USA. This will also result in new insights with regard to import/export problems: these show important differences in a country-bases approach in comparison with an analysis at a continental level such as OECD-Europe [19].

124

d. In the last phase of the project the results of the different subprojects will be integrated within the context of the framework established in the first phase described above

B. Objectives and expected results/products The aim of the project is to obtain a better understanding of the possibilities and effects of GHG emission reductions that can be realised through direct and indirect changes in consumption patterns of households. The project is expected to yield results that show contrasts in GHG emissions between different uses of goods and services at the functional level and at the level of different classes of households.

Furthermore, the consequences for industrial product sectors and service sectors will be established. The same holds for the consequences of changes in the economic structure for the energy/GHG intensities of household services. Finally, the results will be contrasted to results that hold for other countries and to results that are valid at the more aggregated level of Europe. This makes the results of practical use for the formulation of public policy and for the identification of new instruments and methods directed at the induction of the required changes in behaviour of the institutions involved.

C. Relevance and potential use of the expected results for science and policy making The project will result in the development of integrative research methods that surpass the usual more or less mono-disciplinary approaches (e.g. focusing on technical aspects only, on a single conservation option neglecting the consequences for the use of the available resource base, on the direct energy consumption only, on the effect of information campaigns, etc). This is based upon instruments and methods that have proven their value and impact in different disciplines (economic/energy I/O analysis at IVEM-RUG and STS-UU, analysis of goods and products in energy/GHG terms at IVEM-RUG, STS-UU and HCS-WAU, functional analysis of household services at HCS-WAU and analysis of optimal utilisation of household resources at HCS-WAU). This integrative approach provides the basis for optimal use of instruments and methods that lead to reduction of energy/GHG intensities. Through cooperation with

125

other institutes it also contributes to the dissemination of these methods and instruments.

Assessment of the potential for GHG emission reductions by changes in household consumption patterns forms an essential ingredient for the decision making process within the relevant branches in public policy (including public utilities, the various educational systems, etc) in a national and in an international context. It also serves as input for more implementative studies that start from different scientific disciplines (e.g. the array of social sciences) and for cost-benefit analyses of policy instruments (e.g. energy/eco-taxes). Furthermore, it sheds an interesting light on the changes that may take place within industry and service sectors (changes with possible consequences for quantity and quality of the labour force, balance of trade, etc).

The Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment (Directorate Air and Energy) is interested in studies with respect to the effects of changes in consumption patterns. To that end the Ministry has initiated a ‘demonstration project’ (in wich IVEM-RUG and STS-UU take part) that aims to show the feasibility of energyextensive consumption patterns. In connection with that activity representatives of the Ministry have expressed their strong interest in this research proposal as a way of further evaluating the possibility and effects of energy-extensive consumption patterns.

D. International use; contribution to international programmes The project fits within the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme (HDP), mainly in research programme 2) ‘Industrial Transformation and Energy Use’, focus 2, ‘Energy Production and Consumption’, although there are linkages to other research programmes within HDP too.

The project team can build on expertise within the cooperating institutes concerning energy intensities of household consumption items and of the economies of a number of European countries. This will form the basis for international comparisons that can contrast the results for the Netherlands with those in other OECD countries. International cooperation will take place with respect to the international comparison 126

of the energy intensities of products and product groups and with respect to the energy requirements of the complete consumption packages of households. Intensive cooperation will take place on the exchange of data and the data processing in order to make correct international comparisons. This process has already started with the ETH-Zurich (dr. P. Hofstetter from the Gruppe Energie –Stoffe-Umwelt, see [20,21]). Cooperation efforts are constraint by the very fact that this kind of research approach has only emerged during the last years and thus is hampered by the features that normally accompany first of a kind studies.

Parallel to the research into energy intensities of industrial and service sectors and of household consumption patterns, IVEM-RUG is pursuing a research program in an international context concerning the development of so-called ECCO models. ECCO type models describe the economic processes in energy terms, and enable the exploration of (un)sustainable development paths [22,23]. These research efforts are carried out in international cooperation and in continuous exchange of data and methods. The overlap with the present proposal is in the common use of data bases and in the analysis of changes in industrial and service sectors. Annex to these lines of research is the cooperation of IVEM-RUG with the Regional Economics group of prof. dr. J. Oosterhaven at the RUG in the field of I/O analysis and the construction and use of I/O tables that are compatible at the European level (for the EC) [24]. Through this cooperation data has become available that will enable the analysis of structural effects at the European level. The HOMES-team [25] has recently established working contacts with IIASA (dr. N. Nakicenovic of the Environmentally Compatible Energy Strategies Project). In 1995 a common workshop has been held on issues related to this proposal. Also participation in IIASA conferences has been arranged. The research team for the present proposal can capitalise on this networdking exercise, as there exists overlap in research interest.

E. Other Dutch and European related research financing programmes The Dutch National Science Foundation has awarded a grant of 1.8 Mƒ to a consortium headed by IVEM-RUG for the execution of a 5-year 1994-1999 research program (called HOMES) into the household metabolism, concentrating on material 127

flows in, through and out the households [25]. This implies a long-term cooperation between IVEM-RUG, HCS-WAU and three other institutes (Social Psychology and Urban Planning from the RUG, and the CSTM group at the University of Twente). The present proposal will profit from the insights, methods and case-studies that will be developed in the HOMES program and vice-versa.

At the policy Studies at ECN a long-term research program is carried out concerning the development and application of the MARKAL moddeling approach (within an international setting) [26]. STU-UU and IVEM-RUG are actively participating as subcontractors in that program. A fruitful cooperation with mutual benefits is expected to continue regarding options for changes in industrial and service sectors. There is also a regular exchange and cooperation with the ‘lifestyle research’ performed at ECN.

The RUG has decided on a stimulation program concerning environmental economics. IVEM-RUG and the Regional Economics group of the RUG collaborate under this program in a research project aiming at the development of an ECCO model at the European level. Such a modelling exercise is feasible as inthis cooperation the relevant data and methods are available. IVEM-RUG has added to this project a Ph-D project aiming at the analysis of materials flows and processes also at the European level, thereby adding to the analysing power of the ECCO models.

References 1

Vringer, K. and K. Blok, 1993a: The direct and indirect energy requirements of households in the Netherlands. NW&S-UU: Utrecht, The Netherlands.

2

Rossum, T.F.M.

van and H.C. Wilting, 1991: Energiegebruik en

huishoudelijke consumptie. Case studies, Dep. of Science Technology and Society (NW&S) of the Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3

Engelenburg, B.W.C van, T.M.F. van Rossum, K. Vringer and K. Blok, 1994: Calculating the energy requirement of household purchases. A practical step by step method. Energy Policy, Vol.22, pp.648 – 656.

4

Kok, R., H.C. Wilting, and W. Biesiot, 1993: Energie-intensiteiten van voedingsmiddelen, Report nr. 59, Interfacultaire Vakgroep Energie en Milieukunde, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen.

128

5

Vringer, K. and K. Blok, 1993b: Energie-intensiteiten van de Nederlandse Woning. NW&S-UU: Utrecht, The Netherlands.

6

Vringer, K., J. Potting, and K. Blok, 1993c: Energie-intensiteiten van de Huishoudelijke Inboedel. NW&S-UU Utrecht, The Netherlands.

7

Paauw, K.F.B. de and A.H. Perrels, 1993: De Energie-intensiteiten van Consumptiepakketten, Report nr. ECN-C-93-043, ECN-ESC, Petten.

8

Wilting, H.C., 1992: EAP, Energie Analyse Programma, Handleiding. Report nr. 56, Interfacultaire Vakgroep Energie en Milieukunde, RijksUniversiteit Groningen, Groningen.

9

ECN, Studiedag Leefstijl en Energie 1 en 2, 1993/1994: Waar moet dat heen, hoe zal dat gaan: een interdisciplinaire kruisbestuiving. en: Op weg naar energie-extensieve(re) leefstijlen: Leiden alle wegen naar Rome? ECNbeleidsstudies, Petten.

10

Wilting, H.C., W. Biesiot and H.C. Moll, 1994: Economische activiteiten vanuit energetisch perspectief, veranderingen in Nederland in de periode 1969-1988. IVEM-RUG: Groningen, The Netherlands.

11

Schneider, H.C., 1993: Op zoek naar energie-extensieve leefstijlen: Bestedingspatronen en energiebeslag van Nederlandse huishoudens (concept eindrapport). Report nr. 9346, Communicatie En Adviesbureau over energie en milieu, Rotterdam.

12

Vringer, K., J. Potting, K. Blok and R. Kok, 1993d: Onderbouwing Reductiedoelstelling Indirect Energieverbruik Huishoudens, voor een demonstratieproject en het kader van Levensstijlen en Energieberbruik. NW&S-UU en IVEM-RUG: Utrecht, The Netherlands.

13

Potting, J. and K. Blok, 1994: Life-cycle assessment of four types of floor covering. Dept. of science, Technology and Society, Utrecht University

14

Groot-Marcus, J.P. and E. Scherhorn, 1994: Schone was; een gewichtige zaak. Huishoudstudie, 4 (1994) nr. 1.

15

Tweehuysen, R., B. Stork, M. Verwoerd, M.J. Terpstra and H. Kanis, 1982: Energiebesparing bij huishoudelijke toestellen; een inventarisatie van toekomstige technische (on)mogelijkheden. SWOKA onderzoeksrapporten. nr. 12, ‘s-Gravenhage.

129

16

de Leeuw, E., 1994: De invloed van de spaardouche op het energieverbruik. Vakgroep Huishoudstudies, LUW, Wageningen

17

Rond,

F.,

1994:

Douchegedrag:

Meten

is

weten?!.

Vakgroep

Huishoudstudies, LUW, Wageningen 18

Cramer,

J.,

1993:

Produktgericht

milieubeheer:

een

onderzoekprogrammering door de Klankbordgroep Onderzoek ten behoeve van Produktgericht Milieubeheer (OPM). RMNO publicatie nr. 78, Rijswijk 19

Blonk, T.J., R. van Duin en P.A. Okken, 1991: CO2 en materialen: De CO2emissie 1988 vanwege Nederlandse produktie en gebruik van materialen. Report nr. ECN-I—91-058, ECN-ESC, Petten.

20

Hofstetter, P., 1992: Persönliche Energie- und CO2-Bilanz: Fragebogen und Berchnungsgrundlagen

und

Kommentar

zun

Fragebogen,

Aktion

Klimaschutz. 21

Hofstetter, P., 1992: Mein persönlicher Energieverbrauch, Aktion Klimaschutz.

22

Noorman, K.J., 1995: Exploring Futures from an energy perspective. A Natural capital accounting model to study into the long-term economie development of the Netherlands. Thesis RUG.

23

Slesser, M., 1993: ECCO, Simulation software for assessing national Sustainable Development; part 1 and 2, Resource Use Institute, Edinburgh.

24

Boomsma, P., J. van der Linden and J. Oosterhaven, 1991: Construction of intercountry and consolidated EC input-outputtables, in: D.J.F. Kamann and P. Rietveld (red.), Nieuwe ideeën in Nederlands ruimtelijk onderzoek, Stichting Regional Science Associaton Nederland.

25

NWO- research Program for Sustainability and Environmental Quality, 1992: HOMES: Household Metabolism Effectively Sustainable. IVEMRUG, PPSW-RUG, Huishoudstudies-WAU en UT-CSTM.

26

Gielen, D.J. and P.A. Okken, 1994: Optimisation of integrated energy and materials systems; linked energy and material flows; methodological considerations and model calculations for the Netherlands beyond 2000, ECN, Petten.

130

APPENDIX 2 PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GREENHOUSE PROJECT.

Berg, M. van den, Vringer, K (1999) The energy requirements of holidays, and household reduction options, Report 99112, NW&S-University Utrecht, Utrecht. Brouwer, N.M., Groot-Marcus, J.P., Kramer, K.J. (1997) Duurzaam bewaren van vlees. In: Dam, Y.K. van, Hoog, C. de, Ophem J.A.C. van (eds). Consument en duurzaamheid. Garant, Leuven/Apeldoorn, 165-190. Brouwer, N.M. (1998) Energy reduction options for food consumption in Dutch households. Wageningen Agricultural University, Household and Consumer Studies, H&C Working paper 9801, Wageningen, 13 p. Groot-Marcus, J.P., Potting, J, Brouwer, N.M., Blok, K. (1996) Households, energy consumption and emission of greenhouse gases. Wageningen Agricultural University, Household and Consumer Studies, Wageningen, 47 p. Groot-Marcus, J.P., Moll, M. van, (1996) Textile characteristics, laundering and the environment. Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 20: 261-273. Groot-Marcus, J.P. (1997) Sustainability in household resource management; the metabolism of households. In: Pichler, G. (ed), Herausforderungen für die Alltagsbewéltigung. Hauswirtschaft als Basis für soziale Veraenderungen, Wien, 219-220. Groot-Marcus, J.P., Scherhorn, E. (1998) Sustainability of everyday meat consumption. In: Turkki, K. (eds). New Approaches to the Study of Everyday Life. Part II. University of Helsinki. Department of Home Economics and Craft Science, report 4, Finland. p.176-184. Groot-Marcus, J.P. (1998) Water and energy consumption for showering: influence of user habits and shower head design. Hauswirtschaft und Wissenschaft 46: 115120. Groot-Marcus, J.P.; Scherhorn, E. (1999) Ontwikkeling energiegebruik in de huishouding; Relaties met huishoudelijk gedrag. Wageningen Agricultural University, Household and Consumer Studies, H&C working paper 9903, 41 p. Groot-Marcus, A.P.; Scherhorn, E. (1999) Energy (in)efficient food storage in households. In: Energy Efficiency and CO2 Reduction: The Dimensions of the

131

Social Challenge: Proceedings of the 1999 ECEE Summer Study, Mandelieu, May 31-June 4 1999. Paris. Kramer, K.J. (1996) Energy consumption in food products life cycles. In: Ceuterick, D.(ed) International Conference on Application of Life Cycle Assessment in Agriculture, Food and Non-Food Agro-Industry and Forrestry: Achievements and Prospects, Brussels 4-5 April 1996, VITO. Kramer, K.J. (1996) Verschillen in benodigde energie van maaltijdonderdelen. Voeding, maandblad van de Stichting Voeding Nederland, 57 (1-2):12-15. Kramer, K.J. (1997) Emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the life cycles of food products. In: Bridging the Global Environment: Technology, Communication, and Education. Proceedings of the 18th Annual SETAC Meeting. 16-20 November 1997, San Francisco, p244. Kramer, K.J. (1997) Greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use and from Dutch electricity production. Ivem working paper 9702, Groningen. Kramer, K.J. (1997) Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions related to freight transport. Ivem working paper 9703, Groningen. Kramer, K.J., Moll, H.C. Nonhebel, S. (1998) Emission of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption and its reduction potential. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in Agriculture, Agro-Industry and Forestry. December, Brussels, pp 73-80. Kramer, K.J. (1998) Options to reduce the energy use and greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch household food consumption. Ivem Working paper 9801, Groningen. Kramer, K.J. (1999) Emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the life cycle of food products. In: Kok, M.J.T., Verweij, W. (eds) Proceedings of the first NRP-II Symposium on Climate Change Research, Garderen October 1998. Bilthoven, p 243. Kramer, K.J., Moll, H.C., Nonhebel, S. (1999) Total greenhouse gas emissions related to the Dutch crop production system. Agriculture, Ecosystem & Environment, 72: 9-16. Kramer, K.J., Moll, H.C., Nonhebel, S., Wilting H.C. (1999) Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption. Energy Policy 27: 203-216.

132

Kramer, K.J. (2000) Food Matters, On reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from household food consumption. PhD Thesis, University Groningen, The Netherlands. Locht, J. van der, (1998) Onderzoek naar het energieverbruik van voedingsproducten met verschillende mate van voorbewerking. MSc thesis, WAU, Household and Consumer Studies, Wageningen. Moll, H.C. (2000) Multilevel evaluation of options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by change of houssehold consumption patterns. Proceedings of the t hird international conference of the European Society for ecological economics. May 3-6, Vienna. Nonhebel, S. (1998) GreenHouse project: reducing the emission of greenhouse gases by changing domestic consumption patterns, Change, 41, 4-6. Nonhebel, S., Moll, H.C. (1999) Reduction patterns of greenhouse gas emissions related to household consumption patterns. In: Kok, M.J.T., Verweij, W. (eds) Proceedings of the first NRP-II Symposium on Climate Change Research, Garderen October 1998. Bilthoven, pp 237-242. Oudshof, B.C. (1996) Energieverbruik voor buitenshuis geconsumeerde maaltijden. MSc thesis, Ivem, RUG, Groningen. Potting, J., Blok, K. (2000) Energy requirements and greenhousegas emissions related to clothing in the Netherlands. Working paper NW&S-UU, Utrecht. Reinders, A.H.M.E., Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1999) The direct and indirect energy requirement of households in the European Union in 1994. Report 99019, NW&S, Utrecht University, Utrecht. Reinders, A.H.M.E, Blok, K. (1999) Non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions resulting from 4 selected products used by households in The Netherlands. Report 99070, NW&S, Utrecht University, Utrecht. Razenberg, B.J. (2000) De potentiele energiereductie in de groenteconsumptie van Nederlandse gezinnen. NW&S report-I-2000-20, Utrecht. 116p. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1997) Energy Use for Textile Maintenance in Dutch Households. Source: In: Proc. XVIIth Int. Home Econ. and Cons. Res. Conf. School of Management and Consumer Studies, Univ. of Dundee, Scotland. 13 pp. Uitdenbogerd, D.E., Brouwer, N.M., Groot-Marcus, J.P. (1998) Domestic energy saving

potentials

for

food

and

textiles:

an

empirical

study.

H&C 133

onderzoeksrapport

2,

Wageningen

Agricultural

University,

The

Netherlands,159p. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1998) Challenges for family households to reduce their energy consumption for textile drying. In: K.Turkki (editor). New Approaches to the Study of Everyday Life, Part II, University of Helsinki. Department of Home Economics and Craft Science, report 4, Finland. pp.193-200. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1998) Domestic energy Saving Potentials for food and textiles. An Empirical Study. Poster and presentation at Workshop Domestic Clothes Washing Case, CHAINET, European Network on Chain Analysis for Environmental Decision Report, Noordwijkerhout. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1998) Domestic energy Saving Potentials for food and textiles. An Empirical Study. In: Kok, M.J.T., Verweij, W. (eds) Proceedings of the first NRP-II Symposium on Climate Change Research, Garderen October 1998. Bilthoven, 245. Uitdenbogerd, D.E., Groot-Marcus, J.P., Terpstra, M.J. (1999) De (on)mogelijkheden om binnen de huishoudvoering milieuvriendelijker te zijn. Eerste resultaten van de

survey.

Landbouwuniversiteit

Wageningen,

Huishoud-

en

Consumentenstudies, Wageningen. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1999) Energy reduction potentials in the domestic sector. An empirical study for food and textiles. Research abstracts of the 10th Global Warming Conference & Expo, 5-9 May 1999, Fuji Yoshida, Japan (to be published). Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (1999) Changing household behaviour in environmentally sound direction: constraints and solutions. In: Noorman, K.J. (ed): Proceedings, Second International Symposium on Sustainable Consumption, June 3-4, 1999, Groningen. 251-261. Uitdenbogerd, D.E., Vringer, K. (1999) Energy reduction options for the domestic maintenance of textiles, H&C Working paper 9902, Wageningen. Uitdenbogerd, D.E. (2000) Influence of practices on acceptance of energy reduction options by households- a household perspective on behaviour change. In: Proceedings of the third international conference of the European Society for ecological economics. May 3-6, Vienna.

134

Vringer, K., Blok, K. (2000) The energy requirement of cut flowers and consumer options to reduce it. Resources, conservation and recycling 28: 3-28. Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1995) Energiebeslag van Bloemen. Report 95101, NW&S-UU, Utrecht. Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1996) Afbakening activiteiten categorieën voor het project GreenHouse. Report 96079, NW&S-UU, Utrecht. (internal report). Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1996) Assignment of the energy requirement of the retail trade to products. NW&S-UU, Utrecht.(internal note). Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1997) Do higher incomes pay more? The effect of priceincome relations on the direct and indirect energy requirement of households in the Netherlands. Report 97004, NW&S-UU, Utrecht. Vringer, K., Blok, K. (1997) Het directe en indirecte energiegebruik van huishoudens; Kenmerken, trends en perspectieven voor reductie. In: Perrels, A. (ed.), Bundel Energie en gedrags-patronen, ECN, Petten. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W. (1996) An energy perspective on economic activities. In: Proceedings of the conference "Ecology, Society, Economy: In pursuit of sustainable development" (The Inaugural Conference of the European branch of the International Society for Ecological Economics). Saint Quentin en Yvelines: Université de Versailles. Wilting, H.C. (1996) An energy perspective on economic activities. PHD-Thesis Groningen University, Groningen. Wilting, H.C. (1997) Energy and labour intensities of commodities in the Netherlands (1990), Ivem working paper, Groningen. Wilting, H.C. (1997) An energy perspective on economic activities. Change 35: 1113. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W. (1998) Household energy requirements, in: Noorman, K.J. en Schoot-Uiterkamp, A.J.M. (eds.), Green households: Domestic consumers, environment and sustainability, Earthscan Publications Ltd London. pp 64-81. Wilting, H.C., Moll, H.C., Nonhebel, S. (1998) Input Output Energy Analysis as a Life-Cycle Approach to study Household Consumption Patterns. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ecobalance, Tsukuba, Japan, pp 227-230. Wilting, H.C., Benders, R.M.J., Biesiot, W., Moll, H.C. (1998) Calculating Life Cycle Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Household Consumption Items 135

with the EAP Computer Program. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ecobalance. Tsukuba , Japan, pp 223-226. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W., Moll, H.C. (1998) Trends in Dutch Energy Intensities for the Period 1969-1988. Energy 23 (10): 815- 822. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W., Moll, H.C. (1998) An Input-Output Methodology for the Evaluation of Technological and Demand-Side Energy Conservation Options, paper presented at the Twelfth International Conference on Input-Output Techniques, 18-22 May 1998, New York, USA. Wilting, H.C., Moll, H.C., Nonhebel, S. (1999) The overall effect and changes in household consumption patterns on GHG emissions. In: Kok, M.J.T., Verweij, W. (eds) Proceedings of the first NRP-II Symposium on Climate Change Research, Garderen October 1998. Bilthoven, pp 244. Wilting, H.C., Moll, H.C., Nonhebel, S. (1999) Input Output based modelling of demand-side energy conservation options. In: Noorman, K.J and Moll, H.C., (eds). Proceedings of the International Resource Accounting Modelling Workshop, IVEM OR 96, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, pp 159-171. Wilting, H.C., Benders, R.M.J., Biesiot, W., Louwes, M., Moll, H.C. (1999) EAP, Energy Analysis Program; Manual version 3.0. IVEM OR 98, Rijksuniveristeit Groningen. Wilting, H.C., Biesiot, W., Moll, H.C. (1999) Analysing Potentials for Reducing the Energy Requirements of Households in the Netherlands. Economic Systems Research 11:233-243. Witte, A.E. de, (1996) Energieverbruik voor thuisgeconsumeerde maaltijden. IVEMdoctoraalverslag, IVEM, RU Groningen.

136

APPENDIX 3 CO-ORDINATION WITH OTHER PROJECTS AND PROGRAMMES

In the Netherlands (sustainable) consumption was addressed in several programmes. The most important ones, next to the Greenhouse project, were the HOMES programme, the Perspective-project and the SusHouse project. The results of these programmes are used in the integration phase of the Greenhouse project, comparing the results of these programmes with the findings in studies being part of the GreenHouse project. During the execution of the GreenHouse project discussions and exchanges of results were effected between the teams of these projects. The HOMES programme was together with GreenHouse project co-ordinated by IVEM-RUG. In the HOMES programme results were obtained using the energy life cycle analysis methodology developed in the Lifestyle project and the GreenHouse project (see the first HOMES book: Noorman and Schoot Uiterkamp 1998). Results of GreenHouse subprojects were presented and discussed at the second HOMES workshop (1999 in Paterwolde, the Netherlands). In the Perspective project the results of the Lifestyle project were used extensively. The project-leader of the Perspective project was member of the sounding-board group of the GreenHouse-project and contributed to the discussions of the GreenHouse project results. The project-leader of the SusHouse project was also a member of the sounding-board group of the Greenhouse project, At the second HOMES workshop members of the SusHouse project presented their research results. In this way their findings contributed to the integration phase of the Greenhouse project. The RUG funded, within a stimulation programme concerning environmental economics, a collaborative project of IVEM-RUG and the Regional Economics Department of RUG. In this project an European energy accounting model was developed (see Battjes 1999). The methodology developed in this project and its findings contributed substantially to the international comparison research of the GreenHouse project.

137

References Battjes, J.J.( 1999) Dynamic modelling of energy stocks and flows in the economy, an energy accounting approach. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Groningen

Noorman, K.J. and T. Schoot Uiterkamp (eds.) (1998) Green Households? Domestic consumers, environment and sustainability. Earthscan Publications, London

138

APPENDIX 4 On following conferences and meetings research done within the context of the GreenHouse project was presented. From all meetings proceedings have been published and reference to presented work can be found in appendix 2. 1996 International Conference on Application of Life Cycle Assessment in Agriculture, Food and Non-Food Agro-Industry and Forestry: Achievements en Prospects, Brussels 4-5 April 1996. The Inaugural Conference of the European branch of the International Society for Ecological Economics. Saint Quentin en Yvelines: Université de Versailles. 1997 AEC-symposium Perspectiefvolle ontwikkelingen op het gebied van energie III, 3 april 1997, Hilversum. XVIIth Int. Home Econ. and Cons. Res. Conf. School of Management and Consumer Studies, Univ. of Dundee, Scotland Bridging the Global Environment: Technology, Communication, and Education. 18th Annual SETAC Meeting. 16-20 November 1997, San Francisco, 1998 Twelfth International Conference on Input-Output Techniques, 18-22 May 1998, New York, USA. International Resource Accounting Modelling Workshop, 16-17 September, Groningen First NRP-II Symposium on Climate Change Research Garderen October. Third International Conference on Ecobalance, Tsukuba, Japan. Workshop Domestic Clothes Washing Case, CHAINET, European Network on Chain Analysis for Environmental Decision Report, Noordwijkerhout. International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in Agriculture, Agro-Industry and Forestry. December, Brussels.. 1999 10th Global Warming Conference & Expo, 5-9 May 1999, Fuji Yoshida, Japan. 139

Energy Efficiency and CO2 Reduction: The Dimensions of the Social Challenge: 1999 ECEE Summer Study, Mandelieu, May 31-June 4 1999, France. Second International Symposium on Sustainable Household Consumption, June 3-4, Groningen. 2000 Nationaal symposium klimaatverandering 31 maart, Doorwerth Inloop studiemiddag, leren van NOP projecten, Novem, Utrecht 27 april. Third international conference of the European Society for ecological economics. May 3-6, Vienna.

140