A combined sustainability index for energy efficiency measures

Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

A combined sustainability index for electricity efficiency measures T. Goldrath n, O. Ayalon, M. Shechter The Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, University of Haifa, Israel

H I G H L I G H T S








A MCDA of five indices was developed to define a combined sustainability index. Criteria defined were environment, technology, economy, social and political. Five energy efficiency measures were rated, based on their total sustainability score. Measures were in five main electricity consumption sectors. The preferred measure found in the case study was municipal street lighting systems.

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 9 April 2015 Received in revised form 19 July 2015 Accepted 10 August 2015

One of the most substantial tools that serve decision makers in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions includes energy efficiency measures that in most cases benefit from governmental assistance for achieving electricity consumption reduction goals. This paper examines five energy efficiency measures, defining a combined sustainability index. A multi-criteria analysis of five predefined indices was developed (economic, environmental, technology, social and political), providing a combined index for each measure and a tool for identifying the preferred measure within a specific situation, based on its total sustainability score. In this research, a case study was conducted and the preferred measure was found to be municipal street lighting systems, based on its high political and social scores, and its relatively high installation potential. The second choice would be replacement of chillers in the industrial sector, and the least favorable measure is the replacement of water pumps in the water sector. The methodology described brings into account the technological specifications of the measure implemented, and the specific national conditions under which it is implemented. & 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Energy efficiency Sustainability Electricity Demand MCDA GHG emission reduction

1. Introduction One of the key issues facing parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is how to implement greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction without affecting the economic well-being of participating countries. The aim of the Bali Working Plan (UNFCCC, 2007) was to enable the achievement of GHG emissions reduction by seeking a way to maintain economic growth without giving up on improving environmental performance. A consensus emerged that in order to enhance participation of developing countries, and countries with economies in transitions, it is necessary to adopt an approach of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) that are ultimately aimed at mitigating GHG emissions reduction relative to business as usual (BAU) emissions in 2020 (UNFCCC, 2014). n

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Goldrath).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.08.013 0301-4215/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

It has been recognized that energy conservation and efficiency contributes to the reduction of energy expenses, improved quality of life for the consumer, and the reduction of the economic burden and dependence on energy imports for national accounts. It has also long been established that energy efficiency (EE) is a practical and efficient way to reduce GHG emissions (Stern, 2006; Feng et al., 2014). Fundamentally, NAMAs can be very diverse, ranging from project-based mitigation actions to economy-wide emissions reduction objectives, and require a robust framework to ensure progress towards emissions reduction. When designing NAMAs, decision makers rely on previous studies that have demonstrated the benefit of energy efficiency and its role in total sustainability (Okubo et al., 2011). For governments in general, and for manufacturing companies in particular, energy efficient manufacturing is a top priority due to rising energy prices, customers' increasing environmental awareness and the need to mitigate GHGs (Bunse et al., 2011). Similarly, it has been shown that advances can be achieved when managing energy demand via energy integration,

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

with end-users from various sectors (e.g., industry, service, household, agriculture, transport and public sectors) and within particular geographical areas (Kostevšek et al., 2014). Th{C}{C}{C}e connection between EE, process improvement and GHG emissions reduction had also been investigated for sectors such as agriculture and industry (Nabavi-Pelesaraei et al., 2014; Leon et al., 2014), proving that stricter and more efficient processes and practices lead to improved yields and side benefits of sustainability. Cheng (2010) has described an approach for an NAMA framework that is applicable for GHG mitigation from the energy endusers sectors in developing countries, where the building and the industrial sectors are among the largest energy consumers. Cheng (2010) points out that in order to achieve broad GHG mitigation there is a need for an NAMA framework that relies on public sector investments designed to boost private sector investments through project based market mechanisms. With this in mind, it is clear that governments should play an essential role in creating a framework that does not rely merely on market mechanisms, but uses incentives that enhance the ability of diverse economic sectors to reduce costs while at the same time also contributing to improving energy efficiency and reducing GHG emissions. 1.1. Electricity market and the use of indices A major emitter – and therefore a major tool for reduction – is the electricity production market, which in the USA comprised 32% of all national GHG emissions in 2012 (EPA, 2015). As such, electricity production technologies and the fuel mix used are a dominant factor in any national emission portfolio, and naturally in its suggested NAMA. Former research has demonstrated the effect of fuel mix and production technologies on emissions from this energy production sector, and the multiple considerations taken while planning a future electricity production sector. Neves and Leal (2010) and Sheinbaum-Pardo et al. (2012) have examined sustainability indices for electricity markets around the world together with general indices. Although indices such as yearly GHG emissions, energy consumption per capita, or the total cost of energy per household are common (Huang and Lo, 2011) and can offer a good understanding of the consumers and their perspectives of the electricity market, they do not provide a comprehensive understanding of all the stakeholders in the sector. Indices have also been used for project planning in the energy sector (Manzini et al., 2011) and as decision-making tool, especially with regards to expansion and discussion of fuel mix and future technologies (Rovere et al., 2010). Evans et al. (2010) compared sustainability indices of various electricity production technologies, taking into account prices of production, efficiency, land and water use, and the social effect of a power plant. Their work reviewed the Australian market and included a public survey that assessed social acceptance of energy technologies in Australia. Results showed that the Australians prefer solar energy production to all other reviewed technologies. In his research, Alexandru (2013) compared 13 electricity production technologies using 10 indices and an academic experts’ questionnaire, evaluating the weights of the selected indices (62 responses of academics from energy and environmental science department from six universities in Romania). The aim was to design a tool that will enable administrative decision makers to rate various power plants. Out of the 13 technologies reviewed, the hydroelectric power plant received the best score, and the coal ignited power plant received the lowest rank. However, as this research was conducted in Romania, it does reflect the specific Romanian electricity market and the subjective opinions of

575

experts from this area. 1.2. The Israel case study In the State of Israel, the issue of electricity production and management is a very challenging one. Israel is located in the Middle East, bordered by the Mediterranean Sea in the west and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, all countries of non-cooperative economies on all other directions. As a fast growing country with an economy in transition, only recently (2010) joining the OECD and changing definition from a developing country to a developed one, Israel also faces environmental challenges, especially with regards to global aspects, and according to current assessments, would experience a high GHG emission rate of growth in its BAU scenario. Although total Israeli emissions are miniscule within the global context (Yanai, 2010), Israel is exploring frameworks that require government policy intervention, in order to motivate and support the contribution of private, commercial and municipal sectors to EE and technological innovations, where market forces alone would not suffice. Israel has ratified the Kyoto Protocols to the UNFCCC while still classified as a non-Annex I country and, therefore is not subject to mandatory GHG emission reduction (Yanai, 2010). However, as one of the newest members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Israel is making an effort to participate in charting a balanced approach towards GHG emissions reduction together with the global community, through implementing changes in its electricity production market and encouraging EE in all sectors. Israel has a growing population, and its expanding economy is mainly driven by the science and technology sectors. Despite its limited natural resources, the country’s manufacturing and agriculture sectors are highly developed and sophisticated. As it is a semi-arid country with very limited water resources, the country has a keen understanding of the strategic importance of the nexus between energy and water, and has a high rate of water reuse (Teschner et. al., 2012). After years of annual growth rates of over 5%, Israel's economic expansion has recently begun to slow down. According to the OECD's country profiles, Israel’s real GDP annual growth amounted to 5.0%, 4.6% and 3.2% for 2010, 2011 and 2012 respectively, while its population increased by 1.8%, 1.7% and 1.7% for the same respective years (OECD, 2013). Moreover, Israel's energy regulators and infrastructure developers must cope with issues of energy security, local electricity production and planning, and electricity reserve margins. With the challenge of continuously increasing demand for infrastructure combined with limited geographical areas, efficient demand management tools are a must for decision makers. 1.3. Israel's electricity market The electricity market in Israel is dominated by the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC) – a regulated monopoly for controlling manufacturing, transmitting and distributing (Tishler et al., 2002) – and has only opened up to private producers at the end of 2004. Current electricity market data shows a production ability of 13,248 MW at the end of 2012 (IEC, 2012) with a growing share of natural gas in the fuel mix – 40.6% through 2013, while coal share dropped to 56.2% in 2013. Estimations show that electricity demands will rise by approximately 2.7% per year over the coming decade, rising from 55.7 billion kW h in 2011 to 80.5 billion kW h in 2020 (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010), and that the gas share in the fuel mix will continue to grow – following the recent discovery (in this past decade) of natural gas in Israel (Shaffer, 2011). All of these factors described above (e.g., economic expansion,

576

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

Billion kWh 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

3.1% 7.6% 30.0%

5.8%

Residential Public-Commercial Industrial

Generation

20.5%

52 billion kWh

Consumption

Water Management Palestinian authority Agriculture

33.0%

Year

Fig. 2. Electricity consumption by sectors in Israel (2010). (Data source: IEC, 2010).

Fig. 1. Electricity generation and consumption in Israel. 2010–2013 actual (full marker); 2014–2020; projected (empty marker).

population growth and standard of living) are growth drivers for the electricity sector in Israel. Fig. 1 presents the trend lines for electricity generation and consumption in Israel between 2010 and 2020. The data provided is comprised of actual data (2010–2013) and projections that are based on an assumption of a 4% annual GDP increase until the end of the decade, 2014–2020 (MoEW, 2014). As shown in Fig. 1, electricity generation in Israel is just 7–8% higher than the electricity consumed. Another important data representing the gap between the generation capacity and the annual peak demand can be concluded from the ministry of water and energy data, ranging on an average of 12.5% through the years 2004–2015, with a minimum of 5.5% in 2007, and a maximum of 17.3% in 2014 (MoEW, 2014). This highlights the essential need for energy conservation and EE measures, not only as part of an integrated plan for GHG emissions reduction, but also as a way to better manage the national electricity sector and to ensure correct levels of electricity reserves. Consequently, Israel is attempting to chart a course for steering its economy into a low-carbon future and meeting its commitment for a 20% GHG reduction in the year 2020 under a (BAU) scenario (Peres, 2009). In this same course, a 20% EE goal has been set for 2020, posing yet another challenge for regulators and electricity road mapping. The Israel National Plan for the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions was approved in November 2010 by Government Decision no. 2508 (Government Resolution, 2010), and the amount of ILS 2.2 billion, equivalent to approximately US$ 620 million (at an average rate of exchange of US$ 1.0 ¼ILS 3.55), was budgeted for its implementation over the next decade. The plan's main strategies relate to a wide range of EE initiatives, construction and retrofitting energy-efficient buildings (green building), and transportation. The plan, and its associated budget were frozen merely 18 months after its approval. The EE initiatives in the Israeli Climate Action Plan (Shani, 2011) focus on a number of aspects: investments in EE and GHG reduction projects in the industrial, commercial and municipal sectors; incentives for reduction of energy consumption in the residential sector; support for innovative Israeli energy technologies; promulgation of energy performance standards for appliances and office equipment; pilot studies of Green Buildings for new construction and retrofits; and promotion of education and raising awareness. Various implementing ministries received an initial 2-year budget allocation for 2011–2012 in total the amount of ILS 534 million, (equivalent to approximately US$ 150 million) – which are

about 25% of the overall estimated costs until 2020 – with a primary focus of funding energy efficiency measures. Further details about the planning process, the focal action areas and budgetary allocations have been described in previous articles (Ayalon et al., 2012, 2013). This paper examines EE in the electricity consumption sector, based on the assumption that policy action is needed in order to incentivize better penetration of energy efficient technologies in various sectors of the Israeli economy. Such actions are collaboratively funded by the Israeli government, the public sector (municipalities) and the private sector. The anticipated GHG mitigation from this policy action was estimated at 12.26 Mton of CO2 equivalent by 2020, which represent about 50% of the overall GHG emission reduction targets declared by former Israeli President Shimon Peres in 2009 (21 Mton of CO2 equivalent according to the BAU scenario), thus advancing both the efficiency and GHG emissions reduction goals presented earlier. When breaking down the Israeli electricity consumption by sector (see Fig. 2) we note that the largest consumers are the public/commercial sector and the residential sector with 33% and 30% of total electricity consumption, respectively. This is followed by the industrial sector which consumes about 20% of the electricity (IEC, 2010). The information presented in Fig. 2 also indicates that close to 6% of the total amount of electricity used in Israel is for countrywide water management, including desalination, pumping, and conveyance. Considering the difference of opinions and debates regarding the utilization of newly found natural gas in Israel, and the estimations of gas reserves (Dolev and Segal, 2013), it is clear that energy conservation efforts are essential for ensuring electricity security in all regions of the country. These efforts must involve actions designed to reduce energy expenditures and to make energy use more efficient, while preserving a positive ecological balance. Energy conservation and EE are therefore a vital goal for Israel's electricity sector, as with other countries (MoEW, 2015). As expected, different stakeholders in the electricity and efficiency market in Israel have different views and agendas, for example:


The Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP), which mainly



considers environmental aspects such as preventing pollution (air and others) and minimizing GHG emission. The Ministry of Energy and Water (MoEW), which considers issues of energy security, energy independence, and electricity planning and regulation. The Ministry of Social Affairs (MSA), which considers social justness and issues of welfare and equity, such as low electricity prices and electricity to all.

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

577


The Ministry of Finance (MOF), which manages the budgeting for all major projects and regulates preservation and fairness of income from taxes. Apart from governmental offices, a few social organizations are also involved in energy and efficiency management, and focus mostly on issues regarding social justness, low electricity prices and the availability of services, while some environmentally oriented NGOs (non-governmental organizations) deal with issues such as clean air and water, land use and environmental protection, and their effect on human and animal health and life (Social organization count (depending on issue) – 1–2; estimated environmental NGO count involved – 5). In addition, Israel also has a number of international environmental goals commitments, regarding climate change mitigation, and is compared to global best available technologies (BAT), through UN covenants, the OECD, etc. 1.4. Energy efficiency Energy efficiency is defined as meeting a desired level of energy services, such as lighting, space heating, space cooling, torque, computing, refrigerators etc., while using less energy (Berry, 2008). Examples of EE include efficient lights that generate the same light level for less energy demand, upgraded efficient motors, air conditioners and refrigerators – producing the same energy or cold for lower energy intake and energy management systems for largescale consumers. The importance of EE has been demonstrated in many aspects, including economic benefits, emission and air pollution reduction, resource preservation, and social and generational justice, and world reports have shown that without efficiency efforts, world energy consumption would have been 30% higher than that actually measured (IEA, 2011). Energy conservation is known to reduce consumer energy expenses, improve life quality by reducing air and water pollution and increasing health, and from a national aspect, to reduce the economic burden and dependence on energy imports (MoEW, 2015). EE measures were previously divided into five main sectors: residential; commercial; industrial; combined heat and power; and electricity supply and production (Laitner et al., 2012). In Israel, the Ministry of Energy and Water (MoEW) published a national plan for EE, promoting the reduction of electricity consumption during 2010–2020 (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). The plan is an intensive, multi-agency one, aimed at achieving EE and conservation, and which specifies the steps needed to be taken by each sector, defines priorities, and presents actions and implementation methods. The plan includes financial incentives such as tax benefits, subsidies or direct financing; regulations on appliances in all sectors; education, through workshops, advertising and public awareness campaigns, and more (MoEW, 2015). In this research, EE measures are discussed according to their sectorial definition in this national EE plan: residential; industrial/ commercial; local authorities and the water sector (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). 1.4.1. The residential sector The residential sector includes all housing units (single and multi-family units) and takes into account the performance of building shells, equipment, appliances and devices in the living space (Laitner et al., 2012). On the one hand, household electrical appliances such as refrigerators, air conditioners, washing machines and stoves are steadily improving from an energy-consumption point-of-view, and policy improvements such as labeling and compliance with standards have become common practice almost worldwide. On

precent (%) 0

20

40

60

80

100

refrigerator washing machine microwave air condtion personal computer clothes dryer dish washer Fig. 3. Ownership of selected appliances in Israel (2011). (Data in this figure adopted from CBS, 2014).

the other hand, these efficiency improvement trends are often offset by increased global sales, which in turn lead to an increased energy demand. Ownership of electrical appliances in Israel is presented in Fig. 3, which also shows that a high standard of living is often reflected in appliance ownership. In 2011, 100% of homes in Israel owned a refrigerator, and 95.5% owned a washing machine. Although this data explains the high electricity demand in the residential sector, it may also imply a significant reduction potential which could be tackled through increasing home appliance efficiency through replacing old goods and issuing regulations on new ones. The potential demand reduction for this sector is estimated at 47.2% of the total electricity demand reduction which has been planned by the national EE plan for 2020. This equals a 7713 million kW h reduction per year by 2020 (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). 1.4.2. The industrial sector Industry consumes 37% of all global energy, including manufacturing, agriculture, mining and construction (Abdelaziz et al., 2011). Although the average annual growth rate in total world energy consumption has been projected at 1.3% over the next 25 years (EIA, 2011), the expected annual growth for this specific sector is higher, and was estimated to be 1.9% between the years 2020–2030 (Lorubio and Renaud, 2012). These numbers call for significant efficiency action and demand reduction.

other 5% lighting 10% production systems 30% pneumatics and air compression 15% cooling towers 10% chillers 30% Fig. 4. Main consumers in the industrial sector. (Source: Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010).

578

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

In Israel, the industrial sector is responsible for 22% of the total electricity demand, with the main consumers presented in Fig. 4. As seen in this figure, 30% of this energy is consumed by various production systems which differ from one industry to another. 30% are consumed by industrial chillers, used for processes and space cooling. An additional 35% include cooling towers (10%), pneumatics and air compression (15%) and lighting (10%). Demand reduction for the industrial sector in Israel is estimated to account for over 17% of the total demand reduction planned for 2020, with a potential reduction of 2818 millions of kW h (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). 1.4.3. The commercial sector The commercial sector includes all commercial buildings, education, food sales and services, health care, lodging, mercantile, office, public assembly, public order and safety, religious institutions, warehouses and storage, and others. In this sector, major changes can be achieved by addressing air-conditioning systems (heating and cooling) and lighting (Laitner et al., 2012), as in general, these are the main consuming systems in this sector, especially as these systems are often operated for hours and days on end, for example in hospitals, homes for the elderly and prisons. The consumption profile for this versatile sector in Israel in 2009 is presented in Fig. 5, with 3500 million kW h consumed by large-scale commercial companies, 1500 million kW h consumed by governmental offices, and between 500 and 1000 million kW h per year consumed by other consumers such as shopping centers, hotels and health care centers (2009). The main electricity consumption, lighting and air conditioning, are described in Fig. 6, with air-conditioning systems consuming 60% of the total electricity demand in this sector. The expected reduction in electricity consumption for this sector in 2020 is estimated at 22.3% (3640 million kW h), with commercial consumers being the vast majority of this sector (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). 1.4.4. The municipal sector In 2009, local authorities in Israel accounted for about 5% of the total electricity consumption in the country that year, with an estimated operating electricity consumption of 2.5 billion kW h. In monetary terms, this amounts to approximately ILS 1 billion (US$ 282 million). Furthermore, the annual growth in the electricity consumption of these consumers is estimated at about 6% and according to the national plan for EE issued by the MoEW, and is expected to rise to 7% of the total electricity consumption in Israel by 2020 if no action is taken (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010).

Health care Elderly population homes Social institutes Higher education 1000

air conditioning 60%

Fig. 6. Main uses of electricity in the commercial sector. (Source: Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010).

This information has led some local authorities to make considerable efforts in establishing a process for improving the EE in their facilities and assets, including office buildings, educational institutions and street lighting. The Union of Local Authorities in Israel (ULAI) launched a voluntary program known as “Tag Hasviva” (i.e., Environmental Label) in which 60 out of 270 local authorities initiated a survey to collect annual data on electricity consumption in all municipality offices, schools and streets, as a first step towards their energy management. The data collected for 2011 is presented in Fig. 7 and shows the distribution of average electricity usage for different local authorities. 47% of the consumption was for public outdoor lighting systems (Carmel and Goldrath, 2013). It should be noted that the data presented in Fig. 7 only pertains to operations that are controlled by the municipalities (municipal holdings, schools and educational buildings and street lights) and does not include energy consumption by other sources such as households, hospitals, hotels, or industrial, agricultural and commercial sectors, therefore, there are no overlaps between sectors. The expected reduction in electricity consumption for this sector is 7.3%, 1190 million kW h (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010).

outdoor lighting 47%

Hotels

500

lighting 30%

Large scale commercial companies

Governamental offices Security and defence Shopping c enters

0

other 10%

municipal assets 23%

aducation 30% 1500

2000 2500 millions kWh

3000

3500

4000

Fig. 5. Yearly consumption in the commercial sector (2009). (Source: Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010).

Fig. 7. Electricity use in 60 local authorities in Israel (2011). (Source: Carmel and Goldrath, 2013).

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

1.4.5. The agriculture and water sector The two sections of this sector (water and agriculture) are responsible for 9% of the total electricity consumption. According to the MoEW plans, a reduction of 800 million kW h can be achieved by 2020, mainly by upcycling water pumps.

Table 1 Energy efficiency measures per sector.

1.5. Indicators for energy projects and sustainability assessment The use of indicators in relation to energy estimation and planning is essential for setting goals and following up on energy plans. Sustainability indicators have been described in former studies but they refer to general energy indicators and do not characterize energy or electricity efficiency (Neves and Leal, 2010). Commonly used indicators such as GHG emission per year, energy consumption per capita, and total costs of energy per household can provide a good view on the actual consumption, but do not describe efficiency efforts. In addition, although the World Energy Council report (WEC, 2010) suggests a set of indicators that examine the implementation progress of EE per state (primary energy intensity, final energy intensity, the ratio between final and primary energy intensity, CO2 intensity and CO2 emissions per capita), these are overall implementation indicators that indicate national activities from a top–bottom point of view, and do not give a comparison of EE measures themselves. Indicators have also been reviewed for energy project planning (Manzini et al., 2011) and as a decision making support tool for the electricity sector (Rovere et al., 2010; Onat and Bayar, 2010). In China, work has been done to analyze sustainability indicators for EE in buildings (Yang et al., 2010), incorporating worldwide building assessment methods, energy building codes and academic research, resulting in weights assigned to each of the indicators, according to a benchmark survey. This work shows a useful methodology that can strongly support decision making in the field, but is only applicable to the Chinese building sector as it was based on Chinese building codes and methods, and reflects the Chinese stakeholders' opinions. As former research had not supplied indices that support a decision making process between EE measures, this research aims to define and supply such indices, and demonstrate their methodology of use through the Israeli electricity market case study.

2. Methods 2.1. The energy efficiency measures In this research one measure was chosen to represent each sector of consumption. Different EE measures have different efficiency rate that depends on equipment type, installation, and in many cases – the form of use. The dependence on user behavior can often make it hard to estimate the rate of efficiency expected from a single installation, and while trying to estimate the economic index. In order to resolve this problem and assess the indices as free of external effects (as much as possible), the measures for this work were chosen as not-user-dependent (as much as possible), meaning measures that are automatically operated or with minimal external control. Measures were chosen according to the following criteria:


A measure and technology that is currently operational and can



be economically and technologically assessed based on operational data. A measure that represents the sector in which it is operated and has a significant effect on the sector – meaning a relatively high percentage of use in the sector. A measure that its application and efficiency rate have

579




The sector

Selected measure

Residential sector Industrial sector Commercial sector Local authorities Agriculture and water

Refrigerators Chillers Air conditioning Outdoor lighting Water pumps

minimum dependency on external factors – to avoid implications of user preferences (such as rebound effects) and misusage. A measure that has a significant implementation potential in Israel – in comparison with other measures in the same sector.

Measures chosen for each of the four sectors (residential, industrial, commercial and municipal) are presented in Table 1, and can be accounted for according to the described criteria. In the residential sector, home refrigerators where evaluated due to their commonness in homes (100%), and their simple and coherent use, not depending on user preferences or habits. Recent documented activities and projects conducted by the MoEW for replacing home refrigerators supplied relevant data for the analyses. In the industrial sector, chillers were evaluated as they represent a relatively similar tool for many industrial uses, unlike specific industrial processes. Work had also been done to analyze the current status of installations by the MoEW, to map the current situation and to evaluate potential reduction of electricity consumption through applying new regulations and enforcing best available technology (BAT) installations. In the commercial sector, venting and large air conditioning systems were evaluated as they have common technology characteristics, are hardly affected by single personal use, and have been shown to be responsible for 60% of the electricity consumed in this sector. In the municipal sector, outdoor lights were evaluated as they are the most common and significant electricity consumer, and are also a common issue for all local authorities. Projects that had already been installed or evaluated in Israel provide a good indication of the positive potential and value of this measure. In the water sector, water pumps were evaluated as they are the largest and most dominant consuming system, most owned and operated by ‘Mekorot’, the Israel National Water Company, making it easy to collect data and evaluate their current potential. 2.2. The combined sustainability index As energy efficiency goals are addressed by different stakeholders, it is often defined through different perspectives. Goals such as percent of efficiency reached are common in the energy sector, but on the environmental sector the issues addressed are different, measuring GHG emissions reduction over time. In Israel, the efficiency goal in 20% efficiency by 2020 (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010), while the GHG reduction goal in 20% below BAU by 2020 (Proactor and Shmuely, 2014). These two goals are not similar, and may sometimes lead to different actions. Sponsored by the Ministry of Finance, the actual financing was calculated with an economic point of view, examining the cost of every CO2 ton equivalent abatement (Shani, 2011). This conflict of views had led the choice of examining a combined index that will incorporate all aspects of this issue. In order to fully estimate and scale these EE measures, five indices were defined for providing a broad sustainability indication of each measure: economic, environmental, technological,

580

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

social and political, and were defined similarly to indices that had been formerly used for investigating the electricity production market in Romania (Alexandru, 2013).


Economic index – represents the cost of installation and use of the specific measure;


Environmental index – represents the environmental impact







that a specific measure might have. This index was calculated by assessing the benefits of every megawatt saved as equal to a megawatt not produced. In the assessment of these criteria, the actual implementation potential of each measurement and its actual efficiency rate both played a significant role; Technological index – represents the rate of efficiency that can be expected from a specific measure after installation. Technological estimations, such as the rate of efficiency and the potential of installation in Israel were derived from the MoEW plan; Social and political indices – represent the benefits and faults a measurement might have from a social and political point-ofview, through installation or through avoiding installation. Social and political ratings were estimated using an experts' questionnaire.

Each of these five indices was estimated and scored, based on literature, field data and the experts' questionnaire. 2.2.1. The economic index The economic index for EE measures is not directly defined, as the measures compared are not scalable at a monetary level. The comparison between a home refrigerator and a street light system has no meaning without a normalized index, which would resolve the price gap between a home appliance and a municipal level system. Therefore, in order to compare the measures in the economic view, the payback period (PBP) index was chosen, calculated from the cost of implementation and the rate of expected electricity saving per year. The PBP index was calculated according to Eq. (1):

C /SpY = PBP (years)

(1)

where: C – Cost SpY – Saving per Year PBP – Pay Back Period (in years) The economic benefit and the rate of saving for the different measures were calculated with data from actual field experience that was conducted and published in Israel, such as the national energy efficiency plan (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010), the national plan for GHG emissions reduction (Shani, 2011), the Mckinsey report on the potential of emission reduction in Israel (Mckinsey and Company, 2009), and on actual data collected by the MoEP and the MoEW (personal communication). The cost of implementation includes all engineering activities essential for the replacement projects in all measures, as it was evaluated from the actual data presented to the MoEP and MoEW in the funding requests. Other indirect economic implications, such as creation of new jobs or reducing jobs, increase/decline in other inputs of production that effect the net income or revenues were not included in the economic index. Social aspects were addressed through the social index (Section 2.2.4) and the inputs of production were neglected as the EE measure selected in the industrial sector was chillers, regardless of the process they are activated in. 2.2.2. The environmental index The environmental advantages of EE measures evolve from the non-use of electricity. Each megawatt not consumes is also known

as Negawatt, a power unit not consumed and therefore not produced, through efficiency enhancement or consumption reduction (Bartram et al., 2010). A full implementation of a specific measure will lead to a decrease in electricity consumption, affected by its rate of efficiency and its overall national implementation potential. Theoretically, this reduction will lead to a delay in the activation of a new power plant, thereby preventing environmental costs. The environmental index is a relative index, rating the measures from highest to lowest. Under the assumption that all measures are examined in the same electricity market, it is solely based on the expected electricity consumption reduction from implementing the full potential of the measure implementation in Israel, evaluated according to the data in the national energy efficiency plan (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). 2.2.3. The technological index The technological index (measured efficiency) is the most common EE measure, and is the amount of electricity consumption saved (i.e., electricity consumption reduction) after the specific measure is implemented. The efficiency is a factor calculated and determined by the specific appliance replaced. To calculate efficiency, the basic electricity consumption of the instrument (or service) is necessary, as well as the consumption measured after the installation. The efficiency of the measures is therefore calculated according to Eq. (2):

⎛ ECf ⎞ ⎟*100 EffEc = ⎜1− ⎝ ECi ⎠

(2)

where: EffEC – Electricity Consumption Efficiency, ECf – final Electricity Consumption, ECi – initial Electricity Consumption. Although the efficiency value is incorporated in the environmental index as well as in the technological one, they each have their own significance and importance. The technological index (% efficiency) is the most common index, and is used by the Ministry of Energy and Water as a goal setter (Bet Hazavdi and Drori, 2010). The environmental index is a reflection of the national potential for actual implementation. It is a unique local parameter, and for other case studies, this index will have a different value. The examination of both the efficiency rate and the implementation potential is important, both for stakeholders and for the methodology establishment. 2.2.4. The social and political indices The social benefits of EE measures relate to their availability to the public and the potential job positions they could create (i.e., through changes in work practices or local manufacturing sites, etc.). The political issues concerning EE reflect the local or national governments' benefits or disadvantages achieved through advertising the implementation of a specific measure through media attention or public relations, and which then becomes publicly visible. The methodology used in this research is parallel to social and political indices formerly investigated which relate to the electricity production sector (Wei et al., 2010, Blechinger and Shah, 2011), with the rank of both social and political indices estimated through a questionnaire submitted to stakeholders in the energy and EE sectors in Israel. The questionnaires were submitted and analyzed during 2014, and contained a list of the EE measures and some basic information about them. Experts varied in their field of expertize and occupation: governmental (representatives from the MoEP and MoEW), social and environmental oriented non-profit organizations, academia, the energy and electricity industry and the private sector. Experts were asked to rate on a scale of 1–5, all

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

five measures according to the following indices: support of weak communities; public awareness; better working conditions; support of local production; creation of new jobs; preferring of certain communities over others; use of size or strength advantage (of an organization or local authority) political advantage from application or non-application in the national level; political advantage from application or non-application in the municipal level; creating an environmental perception in the national level; creating an environmental perception in the municipal level; delay of critical decisions; directing budget to a specific measure on account of others. A total of 70 questionnaires were sent out, 25 of which were completed and analyzed. Based on former works in which experts were interviewed in order to estimate energy issues from the EU (52 answers, Carrera and Mack, 2010) and world estimations (62 answers, Alexandru, 2013), the relatively low number of questionnaires answered and analyzed could reflect the Israeli electricity market, which is relatively small and may lack energy, electricity and energy efficiency experts in this field.

3. Results The EE measures were evaluated in five indices, as described in the previous chapter and results are presented in Table 2. In the table, the data collected from the literature and field data of application in the Israeli market is presented, showing the PBP in years – calculated according to Eq. (1), the implementation potential in M kW, according to data from Bet Hazavdi and Drori (2010). The efficiency in percent – calculated from field or literature data according to Eq. (2), and the social and political index as evaluated from the questionnaires (STD in brackets).

581

In order to achieve a normalized value of each criterion, the values received from the calculations were normalized in reference to the highest or lowest value, according to Eq. (3) or (4), as follows:

IVi − IVmin = ratei IVmax − IVmin

(3)

where: IVmin – is the minimal value for measure i, IVmax – is the maximal value for measure i, IVi – is the value of the specific index, ratei – is the rate of the index per measure i. In cases where the index shows a positive trend for higher values (as in the case of the efficiency rate of the technological index, or the implementation potential of the environmental index), the normalized value was calculated by the maximum value:

IVmax − IVi = ratei IVmax − IVmin

(4)

As former work in the field has demonstrated that assigning weights to indices in the energy field does not significantly affect the final rate and the combined index (Sheinbaum-Pardo et al., 2012; Kemmler and Spreng, 2007; Wang et al., 2009), each index in this research was given the same weight of effect on the total rate. With the rating method used here, lower rates reflect a better result, with 0 being the best result and 1 being the worst. The final rates for the different efficiency measures following analyses are presented in Table 3, having been calculated by

ratemeasure =

∑ [rate (i)]

(5)

i

Table 2 Calculated indices for energy efficiency measures. Index

Economic

Environmental

Technological

Social

Political

Units

PBP (years)

Implementation potential (M kW h)

Efficiency (%)

Grade

Grade

1 – best 5 – worst (STD)

1 – best 5 – worst (STD)

Residential sector Refrigerators Industrial sector Chillers Commercial sector Air conditioning systems Municipal sector Street lights Water sector Water pumps

2.72

203

70

2.55 (1.06)

2.42 (0.93)

2.79

1191

25

2.50 (0.88)

2.43 (0.70)

5.40

968

25

2.49 (0.86)

2.39 (0.66)

6.10

616

25

2.36 (0.91)

2.14 (0.75)

7

493

15

2.49 (0.82)

2.51 (0.71)

Table 3 Normalized rates of energy efficiency measures. Index:

Economic

Environmental

Technological

social

Political

Total score

Residential sector Refrigerators Industrial sector Chillers Commercial sector Air conditioning systems Municipal sector Street lights Water sector Water pumps

0.00

1.00

0.00

1.00

0.76

2.76

0.02

0.00

0.82

0.74

0.78

2.36

0.63

0.23

0.82

0.68

0.68

3.04

0.79

0.58

0.82

0.00

0.00

2.19

1.00

0.71

1.00

0.68

1.00

4.39

582

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

combined sustainability index

Political

Social

Technological

Environmental

Economic

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Refrigerators

Chillers

Air Street lights Water pumps conditioning systems

Fig. 8. Combined sustainability index of five energy efficiency measures.

where ratemeasure – is the combined rate for every measure, ratei – is the rate score for index I, where i refers to economic, technological, environmental, social and political index. The normalized rating of all five EE measures in all five indices and their final score is therefore in the value of 0 (best) to 1 (worst) for each index, and the total combined index calculated according to Eq. (5), and presented in Table 3 andFig 8.

The refrigerator replacement measure in the residential sector also has a relatively low PBP and technological advantages, but as its implementation potential is relatively low, its overall score is low, making it less attractive in the total sustainability index score. Water pumps is the less favorable measure among all five analyzed, with not a high enough implementation potential, a high PBP due to very high installation costs, and the fact that water pumps are usually far from the public's eye, resulting in lower scores in the social and political indices. Limitations of the method should also be addressed: 1. The scores in each index, and especially the social and political index are highly dependent on local considerations. While the efficiency is a given value, determined by the technology itself, the implementation estimation is local market data, the PBP is dependent on local electricity prices and the social and political indices are determined by local experts. The methodology can be used for analyzing other markets, but the values need to be re-evaluated. 2. The Israeli electricity market is relatively small. Therefore the number of experts (governmental. NGO's, academia etc.) is small. The rate of questionnaires reply is small (around 40%), leaving index estimations on only  30 opinions. Such numbers leave a high influence on the total score to every single expert. As the methodology used was an equal weight method, each index has the same contribution to the total combined index. Every minor change in any index will result in a significant change on the total combined index.

4. Discussion With the assumption that government budgeting or incentives are the common way to promote EE in the national level, and since budgeting projects are a complicated process and with limited resources, an estimation of the relevant measures available for the electricity consuming sectors in Israel is necessary. Only with a comprehensive, clear-cut indexing can stakeholders be sure that their decisions are optimal, and take into account all aspects of sustainability, i.e., economic, technological, environmental, social and political aspects. The method described in Section 2 provides analyses and rating tool for achieving practical EE measures, and can be implemented by decision makers. The preferred measure in each specific case will be the measure with the highest implementation potential and clear-cut environmental advantages, a short PBP, high efficiency, and advantages of social and political issues. In this specific research, the most preferable measure out of the five investigated (refrigerators, chillers, air conditioning systems, street lights and water pumps) was found to be installation of street lights systems in municipalities. Although relatively expensive to install and is usually part of extremely large scale projects, this measure positively influences the entire population, both through improved citizen services (better lights, better visibility, better control system) and at the economic level, as payment for municipal electricity is derived directly from municipal taxes. Municipal street lights system have a high degree of public visibility, offering local authorities the benefits of political advantages and proof for real leadership and activism. It is a measure that benefits all sectors of society, which is why it achieved a relatively high rate in both political and social indices. The second most preferable measure is this research was found to be the industrial chiller replacement project, with highest scores in the economic and environmental indices. It seems that the Israeli industry has a high and significant potential for implementation in this sector, and the PBP, as calculated from the field data of projects reported over a one-year period have the shortest PBP of all other measures.

Application of this methodology might also be beneficial for large organizations or local authorities, weighing possibilities regarding installation of energy efficiency measures. For local authorities the methodology is identical, considering the municipal interest in social and political implications, much like the government. For industrial or commercial organizations – the social and political issues are not relevant, as management will usually take decisions without such consideration. Never the less, if an organization wants to make a decision based not only on economical considerations, but also based on environmental and technical indexes – the methodology can be used with only three indices as a basis for the combined index calculation.

5. Conclusion and policy implications As described in the discussion – this paper offers stakeholders and decision makers a tool that incorporates all five aspects of sustainability (economic, technological, environmental, social and political) and rates the EE measures, thereby enabling a comparison between small home appliances (such as refrigerators), medium industrial or commercial systems (such as chillers, air conditioning systems and water pumps) and large scale projects (such as street light systems in municipalities). Using the presented methodology, a comparison shows that for the Israeli case study, on the national level, when incorporating all relevant aspects, the best policy would be to encourage (and possibly give subsidies until the market stabilizes) municipal street lights systems. This conclusion might vary in other case studies and possibly under changing electricity market conditions, but the methodology is robust and brings into consideration field data and past experience in EE measures implementation. In many countries around the world, recent years had been a turning point in energy management regulation and policy actions. The realization of the urgent need to take action in GHG emissions reduction had led to policy implications. In 2008, the

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

Israeli government declared a 20% greenhouse gas emission reduction and a 20% EE goal by 2020, and had prepared action plans accordingly. As goals were set, it is now time to set the policy framework needed in order to reach them, and efforts must be made to encourage all electricity consumption sectors to reduce their demand and increase their efficiency. The technological solutions available for the EE market can be encouraged by the government, through financing, subsidies and strict rules and regulations that will encourage (or force) consumers to make the necessary efforts to reduce their electricity demand. This paper addresses the policy decision making dilemma, created by the fact that the government's goal was only defined with regards to technological demands (20% EE under a BAU scenario), but the decisions made with regards to budgeting, subsidizing or other financial incentives must also incorporate additional aspects, such as prices and PBP, environmental effects and social and political benefits or faults, that might result from the implementation of a specific measure, and then promoting these specific aspects over others. Previous work on other aspects of the energy market, reveal that in some cases subsidies and other market interferences by policy makers might have, in a time perspective, a negative effect on the market, as demonstrated for the renewable energy market in Germany (Posner et al., 2014). Since, over time, we encounter more available technologies, reduced prices and changes in fuel mix to produce electricity, the discussed indices should be reevaluated after a pre-defined period. This period will enable the current technologies to be established in the market, yet, to be updated and adjusted to new conditions. Other dilemmas that should be considered may concern the government’s ability to command and control the various sectors and lead them towards goals achievements. In order to force EE actions on the main consumers, governments must use positive tools, such as financing, subsidizing and other benefits, or enforcement tools such as regulations, import or production control, and in some cases (such as the incandescent light bulb) – even banning. In parallel to these efforts, a measuring tool must also be applied – to enable both assessment of progress and actual measured efficiency, and providing information regarding implementation rate and status. Another important tool that might support EE rapid implementation is a bench mark. Providing the consumer – be it a home owner hoping to replace a refrigerator, a CEO considering a chiller upgrade or a mayor, looking for a way to reduce municipality expenses. All these decision makers will benefit from better understanding and confidence in actual data and former experience of similar projects. The ability to examine and rate EE measures from a comprehensive holistic point of view can be the basis for establishing such a benchmark – helping to create and encourage the EE market.

References Abdelaziz, E.A., Saidur, R., Mekhilef, S., 2011. A review on energy saving strategies in industrial sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 150–168. Alexandru, M., 2013. Sustainability assessment of electricity generation technologies using weighted multi-criteria analysis. Energy Policy 65, 284–297. Ayalon, O., Lev-On, M., Lev-On, P., 2012. Greenhouse gas emission mitigation and action plan for the state of Israel: strategies, incentives and reporting. In: Proceedings of Energy Challenge and Environmental Sustainability: 12th European Energy Conference. International Association for Energy Economics (IAEE), September 2012. Venice, Italy. 〈http://www.iaee.org/en/publications/ proceedings.aspx#iaeeperth〉 (accessed 20.05.14). Ayalon, O., Lev-On, M., Lev-On, P., 2013. Greenhouse gas emission mitigation plan for the state of Israel: strategies, incentives and reporting. In: Proceedings of the A&WMA International Conference on Climate Change: Impact Policies and Regulation. 10–11 September 2013. Washington, DC. 〈http://portal.awma.org/ store/detail.aspx?id ¼ 15COMBCP202〉 (accessed 04.03.14).

583

Bartman, L., Rodgers, J., Muise, K., may/june 2010. Chasing the negawatt: visualization for sustainable living. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 30, 8–14. Berry, D., 2008. The impact of energy efficiency programs on the growth of electricity sales. Energy Policy 36, 3620–3625. Bet Hazavdi, E., Drori, A., 2010. The national plan for energy efficiency. Ministry of Energy and Water. 102 pp. (in Hebrew). Blechinger, P.F.H., Shah, K.U., 2011. A multi-criteria evaluation of policy instruments for climate change mitigation in the power generation sector of Trinidad and Tobago. Energy Policy 39, 6331–6343. Bunse, K., Vodicka, M., Schönsleben, P., Brülhart, M., Ernst, F.O., 2011. Integrating energy efficiency performance in production management – gap analysis between industrial needs and scientific literature. J. Clean. Prod. 19 (6–7), 667–679. Carmel, M., Goldrath, T., 2013. 'Tag Hasviva' program – phase A report. The Union of Local Authorotoes, Israel, 48 pp. (in Hebrew). Carrera, D.G., Mack, A., 2010. Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy 38, 1030–1039. Cheng, C., 2010. A new NAMA framework for dispersed energy end-use sectors. Energy Policy 38 (10), 5614–5624. CBS, 2014. Statistical Abstract of Israel. Table 6, Ownership on selected durable goods, percentages 2001–2011. 〈http://www.cbs.gov.il/hodaot2012n/15_12_ 262t6.pdf〉 (last accessed 25.01.15). Dolev, S., Segal, N., 2013. The reform in the Israeli electricity market and IEC, position paper (in Hebrew). 〈http://media.wix.com/ugd/58a970_ 3ba8086522074f9b949878c5840dfd9d.pdf〉. Evans, A., Strezov, V., Evans, T., 2010. Comparing the sustainability parameters of renewable, nuclear, and fossil fuel electricity generation technologies, WEC. Available at: 〈https://www.worldenergy.org/documents/congresspapers/272. pdf〉 (last accessed 10.01.13). Huang, H., Lo, S., 2011. Review and classify the GHGs-related indicators. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 594–602. IEA, 2011. Clean Energy Progress Report. Paris. IEC, 2010. Annual Statistical Report of the Israel Electric Company (IEC), 2010. Haifa, Israel. 〈http://www.iec.co.il/investors/DocLib/stat_2010.pdf〉 (accessed 04.03.14). IEC, 2012. Corporate sustainability report for Israel Electric corporation for 2012. 256 pp. (in Hebrew). Feng, C., Gao, X., Wu, J., Tang, Y., He, J., Qi, Y., Zhang, Y., 2014. Greenhouse gas emissions investigation for towns in China: a case study of Xiaolan. J. Clean. Prod. 103, 130–139, Available online 13.01.14. Kemmler, A., Spreng, D., 2007. Energy indicators for tracking sustainability in developing countries. Energy Policy 35, 2466–2480. Kostevšek, A., Klemeš, J.J., Varbanov, P.S., Čuček, L., Petek, J., 2014. Sustainability assessment of the locally integrated energy sectors for a Slovenian municipality. J. Clean. Prod. 88, 83–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.008, Available online 16.04.14. Laitner, J.A., Nadel, S., Elliot, R.N., Sachs, H., Khan, A.S., 2012. The Long Term Energy Efficient Potential: What the Evidence Suggests, Report no. E121. ACEEE, USA, p. 96. Leon, J., Aliaga, C., Boulougouris, G., Hortal, M., Marti, J.L., 2014. Quantifying GHG emissions savings potential in magazine paper production: a case study on super calendered and light-weight coated papers. J. Clean. Prod. 103, 301–308, Available online 14.04.14. Lorubio, G., Renaud, C., 2012. Power statistics, 2012 edition full report, Euroelectric. Manzini, F., Islas, J., Macias, P., 2011. Model for evaluating the environmental sustainability of energy projects. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 78, 931–944. Mckinzey and Company, 2009. The potential of greenhouse gasses emissions reduction in Israel, 123 pp. (in Hebrew). Nabavi-Pelesaraei, A., Abdi, R., Rafiee, S., Mobtaker, H.G., 2014. Optimization of energy required and greenhouse gas emissions analysis for orange producers using data envelopment analysis approach. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 311–317. Neves, A.R., Leal, V., 2010. Energy sustainability indicators for local planning: review of current practices and derivation of a new framework. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 2723–2735. OECD, 2013. Country Statistical Profiles: Israel 2013; Key Tables from OECD – ISSN 2075-2288. Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris. Okubo, Y., Hayashi, D., Michaelowa, A., 2011. NAMA crediting: how to assess offsets from and additionality of policy-based mitigation actions in developing countries. Greenh. Meas. Manag. 1 (1), 37–46. Onat, N., Bayar, H., 2010. The sustainability indicators of power production systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 3108–3115. Peres, S., 2009. President of Israel, Speech at COP-15, December 2009; 〈http://www. sviva.gov.il/Enviroment/Static/Binaries/ModulKvatzim/peres_copenhagen_eng_ 1.pdf〉; (accessed 05.3.14). Posner, H., Altman, J., Egg, A.a., Granata, A., Board, R., 2014. Development and Integration of Renewable Energy: Lessons Learned from Germany, Finadvice. 〈http://www.finadvice.ch/files/germany_lessonslearned_final_071014.pdf〉 (accessed 08.04.15). Proactor, G., Shmueli, L, 2014. Monitoring and follow-up report on government decisions on electricity consumption reduction and GHG abetment. Ministry of Environmental Protection. Hebrew, 34 pp. Rovere, E.L.L., Soares, J.B., Oliviera, L.B., Lauria, T., 2010. Sustainable expansion of electricity sector: sustainability indicators as an instrument to support decision making. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 422–429.

584

T. Goldrath et al. / Energy Policy 86 (2015) 574–584

Shaffer, B., 2011. Israel – new natural gas producer in the Mediterranean. Energy Policy 39, 5379–5387. Shani, H., 2011. National action plan for greenhouse gasses emission reduction. The Ministry of Treasury, 103 pp. (in Hebrew). Sheinbaum-Pardo, C., Ruiz-Mendozaa, B.J., Rodriguez-Padilla, V., 2012. Mexican energy policy and sustainability indicators. Energy Policy 46, 278–283. Stern, N., 2006. Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change. vol. 30. HM Treasury, London. Teschner, N., McDonalda, A., Timothy J. Foxon, T.J., Paavola, J., 2012. Integrated transitions toward sustainability: the case of water and energy policies in Israel. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79 (3), 457–468. Tishler, A., Woo, K., Lloyd, D., 2002. Reforming Israel's electricity sector. Energy Policy 30, 347–353. UNFCCC, 2007. Decision -/CP.13, Bali Action Plan. 〈http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/ cop_13/application/pdf/cp_bali_action.pdf〉 (last accessed 20.05.14). UNFCCC, 2014. FOCUS: Mitigation – NAMAs, Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions. 〈http://unfccc.int/focus/mitigation/items/7172.php〉 (last accessed 20.05.14). Wang, J.J., Jing, Y.Y., Zhang, C.F., Zhao, J.H., 2009. Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision making. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 2263–2278. WEC (World Energy Council), 2010. Energy Efficiency: A Recipe for Success. 161pp. Wei, M., Patadia, S., Kammen, D.M., 2010. Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: how many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the USA. Energy Policy 28, 919–931.

Yanai, M., 2010. Israel's Second National Communication on Climate Change. 〈http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/isrnc2.pdf〉 (accessed 20.05.14). Yang, Y., Li, B., Yao, R., 2010. A method of identifying and weighting indicators of energy efficiency assessment in Chinese residential buildings. Energy Policy 38, 7687–7697.

Website references EIA, 2011. World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook. 〈http://www.eia.doe.gov/ oiaf/ieo/world.html〉 (accessed 19.3.11). EPA, 2015. Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 〈http://www.epa.gov/clima techange/ghgemissions/sources.html〉 (last accessed 26.02.15). Government Resolution, No. 2508 November, 2010. 〈http://www.sviva.gov.il/Eng lish/env_topics/climatechange/Mitigation/Documents/GovtDecision2508-For mulationOfANatlPlanForGHGEmissionsReduction.pdf〉 (accessed 04.03.14). Ministry of Energy and Water, 2014. Forecast of Electricity Generation and Demand for Israel, 2010–2030. 〈http://energy.gov.il/Subjects/Electricity/Pages/ GxmsMniAboutElectricity.aspx〉 (last accessed March 2014). Ministry of Energy and Water, 2015. Energy conservation, 〈http://energy.gov.il/ Subjects/EnergyConservation/Pages/GxmsMniECAbout.aspx〉 (accessed 25.01.15).