IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/bioerq/v1y2016i1d10.1007_s41247-016-0008-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Approach to Explorative Scenario Analysis in Emergy Assessment with Emphasis on Resilience

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Kamp

    (Technical University of Denmark, DTU)

  • Hanne Østergård

    (Technical University of Denmark, DTU)

Abstract

Fossil energy depletion (specifically peak oil) and climate change are imagined to profoundly affect human civilisation. This motivates assessment of resilience, a concept associated with the ability to persist and maintain function. Explorative scenarios may be used to cast light on what the future may bring. We develop a systematic approach to explorative scenario analysis and attempt to quantify aspects of resilience specifically for emergy assessment (EmA) of production systems. We group system inputs into five categories: (1) fossil fuels, their derivatives, metals and minerals, (2) on-site renewable inputs, (3) slowly renewable inputs, (4) direct labour and (5) indirect labour. We consider the existing EmA indicators of biophysical efficiency (the unit emergy value, UEV), the degree of dependence on free, renewable, natural flows of energy (%R) and the degree of dependence on local inputs (%Local) as relevant resilience indicators in EmA. Formulas to calculate the corresponding indicators for the outputs in future scenarios are provided, e.g. the resulting adjustment factor for the UEV. We demonstrate our approach by parameterising four conceivable energy descent scenarios described by corresponding narratives. We analyse the aggregated effect on UEVs of these scenarios for production systems that differ with respect to how the emergy flow is distributed among the five input categories. We find that for most production systems, scenario conditions significantly affect the UEV. The production systems that rely primarily on on-site renewable resources appear less sensitive to societal changes. The significance of labour inputs varies among scenarios, and a higher percentage of labour inputs leads to increasing UEV in a Green Tech scenario but lower UEV in more radical energy decent scenarios. A comparison of two specific production systems showed that different expectations of the future lead to contrasting conclusions regarding prioritisation. We use the insight gained in the study to suggest venues for sustainable development under changing societal conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Kamp & Hanne Østergård, 2016. "A Systematic Approach to Explorative Scenario Analysis in Emergy Assessment with Emphasis on Resilience," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-11, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:bioerq:v:1:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s41247-016-0008-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41247-016-0008-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41247-016-0008-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41247-016-0008-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fortes, Patrícia & Alvarenga, António & Seixas, Júlia & Rodrigues, Sofia, 2015. "Long-term energy scenarios: Bridging the gap between socio-economic storylines and energy modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 161-178.
    2. Hirsch, Robert L., 2008. "Mitigation of maximum world oil production: Shortage scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 881-889, February.
    3. Abel, Thomas, 2010. "Human transformities in a global hierarchy: Emergy and scale in the production of people and culture," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(17), pages 2112-2117.
    4. Tverberg, Gail E., 2012. "Oil supply limits and the continuing financial crisis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 27-34.
    5. Jessica G. Lambert & Gail P. Lambert, 2011. "Predicting the Psychological Response of the American People to Oil Depletion and Declining Energy Return on Investment (EROI)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(11), pages 1-28, November.
    6. Odum, Howard T. & Odum, Elisabeth C., 2006. "The prosperous way down," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 21-32.
    7. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Understanding the global economic crisis: A biophysical perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 4-13.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mads V. Markussen & Hanne Østergård, 2013. "Energy Analysis of the Danish Food Production System: Food-EROI and Fossil Fuel Dependency," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(8), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Mei-Mei Xue & Gang Wu & Qian Wang & Yun-Fei Yao & Qiao-Mei Liang, 2019. "Socioeconomic impacts of a shortage in imported oil supply: case of China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 99(3), pages 1415-1430, December.
    3. Amaral, Luís P. & Martins, Nélson & Gouveia, Joaquim B., 2016. "A review of emergy theory, its application and latest developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 882-888.
    4. Capellán-Pérez, Iñigo & Mediavilla, Margarita & de Castro, Carlos & Carpintero, Óscar & Miguel, Luis Javier, 2014. "Fossil fuel depletion and socio-economic scenarios: An integrated approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 641-666.
    5. Gonella Francesco & Elia Christian & Vignarca Francesco & Cristiano Silvio & Spagnolo Sofia, 2017. "From Head to Head: An Emergy Analysis of a War Rifle Bullet," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(2), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Robert J. Brecha, 2013. "Ten Reasons to Take Peak Oil Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-31, February.
    7. Logar, Ivana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2013. "The impact of peak oil on tourism in Spain: An input–output analysis of price, demand and economy-wide effects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 155-166.
    8. Melgar-Melgar, Rigo E. & Hall, Charles A.S., 2020. "Why ecological economics needs to return to its roots: The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Jammazi, Rania, 2012. "Oil shock transmission to stock market returns: Wavelet-multivariate Markov switching GARCH approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 430-454.
    10. Thomas Pregger & Tobias Naegler & Wolfgang Weimer-Jehle & Sigrid Prehofer & Wolfgang Hauser, 2020. "Moving towards socio-technical scenarios of the German energy transition—lessons learned from integrated energy scenario building," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1743-1762, October.
    11. Lou, Bo & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2013. "Identifying the environmental support and constraints to the Chinese economic growth—An application of the Emergy Accounting method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 217-233.
    12. Wang, Jianliang & Feng, Lianyong & Steve, Mohr & Tang, Xu & Gail, Tverberg E. & Mikael, Höök, 2015. "China's unconventional oil: A review of its resources and outlook for long-term production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 31-42.
    13. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    14. Sebastian Schär & Jutta Geldermann, 2021. "Adopting Multiactor Multicriteria Analysis for the Evaluation of Energy Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    15. Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang & Buchgeister, Jens & Hauser, Wolfgang & Kosow, Hannah & Naegler, Tobias & Poganietz, Witold-Roger & Pregger, Thomas & Prehofer, Sigrid & von Recklinghausen, Andreas & Schippl, , 2016. "Context scenarios and their usage for the construction of socio-technical energy scenarios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 956-970.
    16. Giakoumis, Evangelos G. & Rakopoulos, Constantine D. & Dimaratos, Athanasios M. & Rakopoulos, Dimitrios C., 2013. "Exhaust emissions with ethanol or n-butanol diesel fuel blends during transient operation: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 170-190.
    17. Andersen, Kristoffer S. & Termansen, Lars B. & Gargiulo, Maurizio & Ó Gallachóirc, Brian P., 2019. "Bridging the gap using energy services: Demonstrating a novel framework for soft linking top-down and bottom-up models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 277-293.
    18. Linares, Ian Marques Porto & De Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2019. "Patent-based network analysis to understand technological innovation pathways and trends," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    19. Miloš Ulman & Pavel Šimek & Jan Masner & Pavel Kogut & Tuula Löytty & Patrick Crehan & Karel Charvát & Antoni Oliva & Stein Runar Bergheim & Milan Kalaš & Denis Kolokol & Tommaso Sabbatini, 2020. "Towards Future Oriented Collaborative Policy Development for Rural Areas and People," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 12(1), March.
    20. Mariana Oliveira & Mécia Miguel & Sven Kevin Langen & Amos Ncube & Amalia Zucaro & Gabriella Fiorentino & Renato Passaro & Remo Santagata & Nick Coleman & Benjamin H. Lowe & Sergio Ulgiati & Andrea Ge, 2021. "Circular Economy and the Transition to a Sustainable Society: Integrated Assessment Methods for a New Paradigm," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:bioerq:v:1:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s41247-016-0008-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.