R()", \, S.\\t~~..:'iS!j --\rADEMY OF SCIENCE8 ~ I

A JOURNAL OF THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

.

I.

Basic Needs and Much MoreWith One Kilowatt Per Capita

BY JOSE GOlDEMBERG. THOMAS B. JOHANSSON,AMUlYA K. N. REDDY AND ROBERT H. WilliAMS

.

~

REPRINTReproduced with permission from AMBIO

Basic Needs and Much.'

With One Ki lowatt PerBY JOSE GOlDEMBERG, THOMAS B. JOHANSSON,AMUl YAK. N. REDDY AND ROBERT H. WilLIAMS

energy supplies to meet the energy re-Conventional thinkin g holds that increased ener gy con- quirements f<;,r this scen.ario at !easonable

costs and wIthout major environmentalsumption is a prerequisite for economic and social develop- and/or security problems.

Th ' b I . f h . h h f d . dl .Outside the Middle East and North Af- -ment. IS e Ie , toget er Wit t e prospect 0 win Ing rican countries, this level of energy use .~:

global petroleum supplies and the high costs of expanding could not be supplied to a significant de- ,.,iII I d b I . h ..gree with domestically produced oil and .

energy supply genera y, ea many to e leve t at It IS not gas. as the estimated recoverable oil and

feasible to improve living standards substantially in the g.as resources in developing countries o~t-

sIde the Middle East and North Afncadeveloping countries. But by shifting to high-quality energy could supply energy requirements for only

carriers and b y exp loitin g cost-effective opportunities for about. two decades (3). .

If, Instead, coal were emphasIzed, manymore efficient energy use, It would be possible to satisfy devel.oping count~ies wo~ld become majorbasic human needs and to P rovide considerable further coal l':!1porters, Since, ~Ith the e~ceptlon

of China, few developing countries have

improvements in living standards without significantly significant coal resources (4). Moreover, a... b h I I major expansion of coal use could cause

Increasing per-capita energy use a ove t e present eve. major global climatic change in a matter of

decades (5).To meet half of the developing coun-

PerhJlps the greatest challenge facing man- average annual rate of 3.6 percent per year tries' incremental energy requirements forkind is to find ways to bring a decent stand- during the 1970s (1). this scenario with nuclear energy wouldard of living to the majority of the world's But this energy growth has been very require building about 100 large nuclearpopulation who now live in abject poverty. costly, especially for the oil-importing de- power plants a year between 1985 andThe poor countries of the "South" account veloping countries, which accounted for 2020. Aside from the financial challengesfor three-quarters of the world's popula- half of the increment in energy use by de- of this undertaking-owing to the fact thattion but have per-capita incomes averaging veloping countries during this period. For nuclear power has proven to be far m.ore .:;only one-tenth that of the rich countries of these oil-importing countries. half the in- costly than originally expected-such wlde- ~;.the "North..' And in the South there are crement in energy use came from in- spread use of nuclear power would entail'enormous disparities between the elites, creased oil imports, which grew at an aver- major risks of nuclear-weapon prolifera-who typically account for 10 to 15 percent age rate of 6.3 percent per year in the tion and nuclear blackmail by terrorists.of the population and one-third to one-half 1970s. By 1981. low- and middle-income because the plutonium generated in reac-of all income, and the much poorer ma- oil-importing developing countries were tor operations is both a nuclear fuel and ajorities. spending an average 61 and 37 percent of material from which nuclear weapons can

It is widely believed that an essential their export earnings on oil imports. re- be fabricated. By 2020 some 3,5 million

feature of any development program spectively (2), kilograms .of we.ap°!1s-usable plutoniumaimed at reducing this poverty must be a If the per-capita commercial energy de- ~ould be ~lrculatlng.1n nuclear co~merc.esignificant increase in the level of per capi- mand growth rates of the 1970s were to In dev~loplng countries each. year w,lth thista energy use. This would seem to be self- persist, the average per-capita rate of scenarIo. Only 5 to 10 kg I~ re9ulred toevident from the strong historical correla- primary commercial energy use in de- !l1ak~ a !1uclear .weapon. It I~ dlffi.cult, to

.tion between energy use and gross national veloping countries would increase from I~aglne internatIonal and natIonal InStl,tU-product (GNP) and the global disparities 0.55 kW in 1980 to 2,3 kW in 2020. Be- lions capable of adequately s~feguardl!1gin energy use levels, While in 1980 per cause the population is expected to nearly essentially 100 percent of this materialcapita primary energy use averaged 6.3 double by then. aggregate commercial against occasional diversion to nuclear

, kilowatts (kW) in industrialized countries. energy use in developing countries would weapons purposes.

the average in developing countries was increase from less than two terrawatts Hydropower and biomass are pr?misingonly about 1,0 kW, including 0.4 kW of (TW)in 1980 to nearly 15TWin 2020. The renewable resources that already In 1980noncommercial energy use, the sources of increment in energy use by developing accounted for nearly half of primary ener-which are becoming ever scarcer because countries in this period with this scenario is gy use in developing countries. But with-of ongoing deforestation and the pressures equivalent to 1,3 times total world energy out major technological breakthroughs.of population growth. use in 1980. or three times world oil pro- these and other renewable resources :::':

Indeed. planning efforts in developing duction. or five times world coal produc- would also be able to make only relatively. ,.

countries have been emphasizing energy tion, or 7.5 times that for natural gas. minor contributions to the energy supplysupply expansion. and a result of this is nearly nine times that for bioenergy. and requirements of this scenario. Althoughthat per-capita commercial energy use in nearly 60 times that for nuclear energy. It developing countries ha\.e thus far ex-d~\eloping countries grew at a vigorous would be exceedingly difficult to increas~ ploiled only seven percent of their hyd-

190 AMIIIO \"(11. .01 ~() oI-C

.100

Mo re ~ 60 0 .6 6 a:.

to.0 60

.~ 0 AGRIC EXPORTERC t ;j .OTHER AGRIC ~ 40 a PRIMARY EXPORTER

0 .OL EXPORTEJI

a P I a ~ .INDUSTRIALIZED COJNTRIES!:! 20 .6ALANCED ECONOMIES

~Q.

0 .o. ENERGY CONSUMPTION PER-CAPITA (kW)

Figure 1. The Physical Quality of Life Index vs. total (commercial plus

non-commercial) per-capita energy use (11).

roelectric resources, the total economic increases in energy supply would lead directly allocating resources to the satisfac-potential is only about 6000 TWhours per many to believe (but rarely to state) that it tion of basic human needs of the poorestyear or 0.7 TW (6). The potential for ex- is not feasible to improve living standards -thereby ensuring that minimum stan-ploiting biomass resources is limited by substantially in developing countries. dards for nutrition, shelter, clothing,land use constraints dictated by the low The gloomy outlook indicated by this health, and education are met (8). There isefficiency of photosynthesis. For example, energy analysis is not inevitable, however, no empirical evidence that targeting basicthe total rate of above ground wood pro- because it arises from the assumption that hum~n needs would lead to slower ec~-duction in all the forests of developing major improvements in human welfare re- nomic growth (9), and there are theoretl-countries is small compared to the energy quire considerable increases in the level of cal grounds for believing that a basic hu-requirements of this scenario (on the order energy use. This assumption should not be man needs policy would lead to more rapidof three to four TW) (7), and only a small blindly accepted, because the consumption growth because of the resulting increase infraction of this resource could potentially of energy is not an end in itself. Increased worker productivity (10).be exploited for bioenergy purposes, as energy use is valuable only insofar as it The allocation of sufficient energy toforests must serve multiple purposes, in- improves the quality of life by providing basic needs programs to ensure that thecluding the preservation of wildlife desired energy services such as cooking, various needs are satisfied is thus of cen-habitat. lighting, water heating, space heating and tral importance in energy planning. A high

Even more modest scenarios for future cooling, personal and freight transport, in- priority for analysis is to estimate the ener-energy growth would pose formidable dust rial process heat, motive power. etc. gy requirements for such basic needs pro-~challenges. The World Bank in 1983 esti- How much energy is needed in the fu- grams.mated that in order to bring about a ture depends on the underlying goals of A phenomenological approach to thistargeted 2.5 percent annual growth in per- developing countries, the energy services analytical problem (11) involves examin-capita commercial energy use from 1980 to required to meet these goals, and the tech- ing the correlation between per capita1995 investments in new energy supplies nological choices available for providing energy use and the Physical Ouality of Lifefor all d~eloping countries would have to these energy services-matters to which Index (POLl). The POLl is an index thataverage some $130 billion per year (in we now turn. focuses on three very basic measures of1982 U.S. dollars) between 1982 and 1992. well-being: infant mortality rate, life ex-Half of this investment would have to pectancy, and literacy. In developing thecome from foreign exchange earnings, re- ENERGY FOR BASIC HUMAN NEEDS POLl every country is first assigned anqui ring an average annual increase of 15 In the 1950s, when development strategies index for each of these measures in thepercent in real foreign exchange alloca- were first being articulated, it was general- range 1 to 100, with the lowest and highesttions to energy supply expansion in this Iy felt that maximizing economic growth values corresponding to the worst and bestperiod. And despite this ambitious was the best way to eradicate poverty; but performances in the world. respectively.targeted energy supply expansion effort, the benefits of rapid economic growth The POll for a given country is then ob-the Bank projected that oil imports by oil- have not trickled down to the poor to tained as the arithmetic average of theseimporting developing countries would still alleviate their plight. While rapid growth is three indices. When the POll is plottedincrease by nearly one-third, to nearly a necessary condition for successful de- against per-capita energy use (commercialeight million barrels of oil per day by 1995 velopment, it is not sufficient. A more plus non-commercial) for a large number(1). The staggering costs of providing such effective way of dealing with poverty is by of countries, it is found that on average a

Table 1. Per-capita energy requirements ass~iated with the satisfaction of basic human needs, (BHN) based on historical E/GNP correlations and the use ofthe Latin American World Model for future economic growth (12).

1970 Per-Capita Required Increment in per-capltaCommercial energy Date by which Per-capita energy

GNP Energy use' intensity in 1970 GNP" Energy use" BHN could be use required to

Region (1960 $) (kW) (Watts per 1960 $) (1960 $) (kW) setlsfledd satisfy BHN (kW)

LatinAmerica 440 1.1 1.67 369 0.6 1992 1.7Africa 154 0.7 1.83 405 0.7 2008 1.4Asia 112 0.7 2.89 394' 1.1 2020 1.8

.Includes an estimated 0.4 kW per-capita of non-commercia! energy use."This is the increment in per-capita GNP. above the 1970 level, required for the satisfaction of basic human needs, as estimated with the Latin American

World Model." Based on the commercial energy intensity in 1970

.As estimated with the Latin American World Model, assuming that implementation of the BHN policy begins in 1980..For the case in which the maximum annual yield of edible products is assumed to be increased from 4 to 6 tons per hectare. to avoid collapse of the

socIety.

A.\IBIO I~~ 191

"-""--~~'--- -~

POll of ahout 911 (a value typical of inuus- ate that are tieing developeu. as \\~ \hall gv-u\ing activiti~s similar to that for \\"~\t-trializ~d countrie\) i\ r~acheu ulr per-capi- ntl\\ sho\\'o -~rn Europe (I~) in the IlJ711s I~xcludingta energy u\e ratcs of 1.0 to 1.2 kW. and \pace heating. which is not needed in mo\tthat further increases in energy use causc ENERGY-EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY developing countries) but is matched toonly very marginal further increases in the The en~rgy crises of the IlJ70s have led to a much more efficient end-use technologiesPOll (Figure I). It should be noted. how- revolution in the technology of energy end than those in common use in Europe.ever, that there is a considerable scatter in use. New end-use technologies that have The activity levels for this scenario arethe data. For an energy use rate of 1.0 kW, recently become commercially available or indicated for all energy-using sectors inthe POll ranges from 60 to 90; for 0.5 that could become commercially available Table 2. The per-capita energy use associ-kW, from less than 20 to more than 80. over the next several years make it pos- ated with each activity in our scenario is

A more fundamental approach to the sible to provide energy services with far the product of the activity level shown inpr~blem involves estimating the energy re- less energy input than is possible with tech- Table 2 and an energy intensity corres-qulrements associated with a future course nologies now in widespread use. ponding in energy efficiency to either theof economic growth that targets the satis- While some of these developments best technology currently available on thefaction of basic human needs. -notably those relating to more efficient market or to an advanced technologv that

The Latin American World Model ad- cooking stoves (13}-have taken place in could be commercialized in about IO.vearsvanced by the Bariloche Foundation (12) developing countries, most of the innova- (Table 3). The resulting total final energycan be used to estimate future economic tions have been introduced in industri- use per capita, obtained by summing over-requirements for meeting basic h.uman alized countries and are often perceived as all activities, is about 1.0 kW (Table ~), orneeds. In this model the path of future being relevant only to those societies. Yet only about 20 percent more than the aver-economic growth is determined by dis- many of these new technologies are of fun- age final energy use rate in 1980!tributing capital and labor among the vari- damental importance to developing coun- It is possible to achieve large improve-ous .economic sectors in ways that would tries, to the extent that emphasizing ener- ments in the living standards characteriz-~a~lm~ze lif~ expec~ancy at birth. This o~- gy efficienc"J:' in ~evelopment plann!ng ing t~is scenario without increa~ing energytlmlzatlon cntenon IS assumed to appro XI- would make It possible not only to provIde use, m part because enormous Increases inma~e the goal of maximizing output so that the energy required for basic needs but energy efficiency arise simply by shiftingbasIc human needs are satisfied as quickly also to provide considerable further im- from traditional, inefficiently used. non-as possible. The model also involves sec- provements in living standards. In short, commercial fuels (which at presenttoral targets for nutrition, shelter, and the pursuit of energy efficiency could free account for nearly half of all energy use ineducation: a daily intake of 3,000 kcal and the developing world from the gloomy developing countries) to modern energy100 grams of protein per person; seven prospect suggested by the above analysis carriers (electricity, liquid and gaseoussquare meters of housing per person; and that energy is a fundamental constraint on fuels, processed solid fuels, etc.). The im-12 years of basic education for all persons the course of future development. portance of modern carriers is evident inbetween ages six and 17. To indicate in a very dramatic way the Western Europe, where non-commercial

The increment in per capita GNP re- potential importance of energy efficiency fuel use is very small. Per-capita final ener-quired to satisfy basic needs and the time for developing countries, we have con- gy use for purposes other than space heat-required to reach this level, as determined structed an energy scenario for a hypothet- ing in 1975 was only 2.3 kW, about 2.5by the Latin American World Model, are ical developing country with a mix of ener- times that in developing countries. even

indicated in Table 1 for Latin America,Africa, and Asia.An estimate of th .t Table 2. Activity levels lor a hypothetical developing country In a warm climate, with amenities (exceptf . b .e henergy requdlreme~ s lor space heating) comparable to those in the WE/JANZ' region in the 1970s.

-or meeting aslc uman nee s usIng~ .this model is calculated as follows:

Eb/C+ (CEI x 6GNP/C), where Eb/C is Activity Activity Level

the tota~ (commercial p~us non-commercia.l) Residential" 4 persons/HHper-capIta energy use m the base year [m Cooking Typical cooking level w/LPG stoves.(say) Watts per capita], CEI is the present Hot :.vater. 50 liters 0,1 hot water/capita/day"average commercial energy intensity of the R.efrlgeratlon One 315 liter relrlgerator-!ree~er/HH

(.lights New Jersey (US) level 01 lighting'economy In Watts per dollar), and IV 1 color IV/HH 4 hours/day6GNP/C is the increment of per-capita Clothes Washer 1/HH, 1 cycle/dayGNP (in dollars per capita) required to Commercial 5.4 m2 of floor space/capita (WE/JANZ av, '75)

satisfy basic human needs, as determined TranspOr1ationvia the Latin American World Model. The Automobiles 0.19 autos/capita, 15,000 km/auto/year (WE/JANZ av, '75)

results of this exercise areper capita ener- Intercity Bus. 1850 passenge~ (p)-km/capita (WE/JANZ av, '75)

Passenger Train 3175 p-km/caplta (WE/JANZ av, '75)'gy ,:,se rates of 1.7,1.4, and 1,8 kW, for Urban Mass Transit 520p-km/capita(WE/JANZav,.75)"Latm America, Africa, and Asia, respec- Air Travel 345 p-km/capita (WE/JANZ av, '75)tively (Table 1) or a population-weighted Truck Freight 1495 ton (t)-km/capila (WE/JANZ av, .75)

, Rail Freight 814 t-km/capita (WE/JANZ av, '75)ave~age energy u~e rate of 1,75 kW per Water Freighl 1/2 OECD Europe av, '78"capita, nearly twIce the present average M If d I ..anu acturlngor eve Oping cou."tnes: , .Raw Steel 320 kg/capita (OECD Europe av, .78)

One problem WIth this analysIs IS that Cement 479 kg/capita (OECD Europe av, '80)the energy intensity of an economy Primary Aluminum 9.7 kg/capi~a (OECD Europe av, '~O)

oriented to serving basic human needs may P~per and Paperboard 106 kg/caplt.a (OECD Europe av, ~9) -

b .t d.ff f h f h Nitrogenous Fer1li1zer 26 kg N/caplta (OECD Europe av, 79/80)e quI e I erent rom t at 0 t e present Agriculture WE/JANZ av, '75

economy, so that the use of present energy Mining, Construction WE/JANZ av, '75

intensities in the calculation is question-able. Notes. .A fu .' Here WE/JANZ stands for Western Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. The

more ndamental problem wIth both WE/JANZ 1975 average values for activity levels and energy intensities given in this table arethis analysis and the POLl analysis now from Relerence 20.being used is that the estimate of energy " Activity levels for residences are estimates, owing to poor data lor the WE/JANZ region.re uiremen .b d ...Equivalent in terms of heal delivered to the cooking vessels to using one 13 kg canister 01 LPG/

<;I ts IS. ase .o~ ~xlstmg e~ergy- month lor a family of 5, corresponding to per-capita fuel consumption rate of 49 Watts.usIng technologies. This IS Inappropnate m .For water heated from 20 to sooCl~oking toward the future, because today's ; See text, ...high energy prices have rendered many of In 1975 the diesel/electric mIx was !n the ratio 70/30.h. " In 1975 the diesel/electric mix was In the ratio 60/40.t ese, techn.°logles obsolete and because " The ton-km per-capita of water freight in 1978 in OECD Europe is assumed to be reduced by hallthere IS a wIde range of new. more energy- because of reduced oil use (58~'o of Western European impor1 tonnage and 29% of that ofefficient end-use technologies that would exports were oil in 1977) and emphasis on self reliance.

be more cost-effective and more appropri-

192 A~IBIO \Ol !':-;O ,-~

-though per capita GDP was 10 times as Table 3. Technological opportunities for a developing country in a warm climate to use currently best.larl!e. available or advanced energy utilization technologies. .

The importance of modern energycarriers can be illustrated via an end-use Activity Technology, Performanceanalysis of cooking, which accounts for .most non-commercial energy use in de- ResIdential

...Cooking 70% efficient gas stove'velopmg countries. The per-captta energy Hot Water heat pump WH, COP = 2.:;"use rate for fuelwood stoves, some 0.25 to Refrigeration Electrolux Refrigerator/Freezer, 475 kWh/year'0.6 kW (0.4 to 1.0 tons of wood per year), Lights Compact Fluorescent Bulbs.. f . f h 0 05 kW -.TV 75 Watt unittS ar m e~cess.o t e. .per-~aplt.a Clothes Washer 0.2 kWh/cycle"rate that IS typical when cooking with 11- Commercial Performance of Harnosand Buildingquid propane gas or natural gas (Figure 2). (all uses, ex. space heating)'The much lower energy use rates for cook- Transportationing with modern energy carriers reflect Automobiles Cummins/~ASA Lewis ,Car at 3,0 1/100 km.both the better efficiency (40 to 50 percent Intercity Bus 3/4 energy !ntens!ty !n ,75

..Passenger Train 3/4 energy IntenSIty In 75"versus 12 to 18 percent for traditional fuel- Urban Mass Transit 3/4 energy intensity in '75"wood stoves) and the better controllability Air Travel 1/2 US energy intensity in 'SO;of stoves fueled with modern energy Truck Freight 0.67 MJ/ton (t)-km'. S ffi .. d fi d h Rail Freigbt Electric rail at 0,18 MJ/t-kmkcarrIers. tove e .Iclency IS e ne .ere as Water Freight 60% of OECD energy intensity'the total heat delivered to the cooking ves-s I'd. .d d b h h . I f h Manufacturinge ..V1 e y t e eating va ue 0 t e Raw Steel AI/, Plasmasmelt & Elred Processes.

cooking fuel. Cement Swedish ave in 1983"In addition to the energy savings associ- Primary Aluminum Alcoa process". .

ated with the shift to modern carriers con- Paper and Paperb?ard Av of 1977 SwedIsh designs.' .Nitrogenous Fertilizer Ammonia derived from methane"

slderable .addltlonal savings can .be gained Agriculture 3/4 of WE/JANZ energy intensity" .:.by adopting more energy-effiCIent tech- Mining, Construction 3/4 of WE/JANZ energy intensity" '..:nologies that have recently become avail- ,.iable. Notes :.

Some of the technolo gies assumed here ' Compared to ~n assumed 50% efficiency for existing gas stoves. 70% efficient stoves having

f h d . (T bl 3) .11 low NO, emiSSIons, have been del/eloped by Thermoelectron Corporation for the Gas Researchor t e omestlc sector a e I ustrate Institute in the United States (36).

how large increases in amenities can be " The assumed heat pump performance is comparable to that of the most efficient heat pumpachieved without approaching the present .water heaters available in the US in 1982 (37).

. I I f W See text.energy co~sumptlon eve s 0 estern " Typical value for US washing machines.Europe. It IS assumed that each household' The Harn{)sand Building was the most energy-efficient commercial building in Sweden in 1981,has a refrigerator/freezer with energy per- at the time it was built. It used. 0.13 GJ of electricity per square meter of floor area for allformance eq uivalent to that of the most purposes other than space heating (18).

..'" .f A 25-percent reduction in energy intensity is assumed relative to the 1975 average of 0.60 MJ/p-efficIent 2-door Unit available In Europe In km for intercity buses, owing to the introduction of adiabatic diesels with turbo-compounding.1982, a 315-liter unit requiring 475 kWh" A 25-percent reduction in energy intensity is assumed r.elativeto the 1975 average of 0.60 (0.20) -

per year which is less than one-third of the MJ/passenger (p)-km for diesel (electric) passenger trains, owing to the IntroductIon of adlaba-I ,. ' .tic diesels with turbo-compounding (electric motor control technology).e .ectnClty requlre.d by .the average. r~- " A 25-percent reduction in energy intensity is assumed relative to the 1975 average of 1.13 (0.41)fngerator/freezer In use m the U.S. Slmt- MJ/p-km for diesel buses (electric mass transit), owing to the introduction of adiabatic dieselslarly. compact fluorescent bulbs, which ; with turbo-compoundin~ (electric motor controltechnolog¥).can be screwed into ordina ry incandescent A SO-percent redu~tlon In energy Intensity IS assu~ed relative to the 1980 US average value of

3.8 MJ/p-km for air passenger travel, owing to various Improvements (38).sockets and which have a light quality Slml- i The assumed energy intensity is 1/3 less than the simple average today in Sweden for single unitlar to that for incandescents, draw only trucks (1.26 MJ per ton-km) .and 70mbinatio'! trucks (0.76 MJ perton-km), to take into accountone-fourth as much electricity Our Improvements via use of adiabatIC diesels wIth turbo-compoundIng.

scenario a m th . I t f fi' 75 k The average energy intensity for electric rail in Sweden, with an average load of 300 tons and an

.ssu es e equlva en 0 ve -average load factor of about 40%.watt Incandescent bulbs burned four hours I A 40-percent reduction in fuel intensity is assumed, reflecting innovations such as the adiabatic

per day. diesel and turbo-compounding.While most of the technologies indi- ,. Assumin~ an energy intensity of 3.56 GJ of fuel and 0.40 GJ of electricity per ton, the average for :i7.

Sweden In 1983. ." Assuming an energy intensity of 84 GJ per ton of fuel (the US average in 1978) and 36 GJ of ,.

electricity-the requirements for the Alcoa process now being developed (39)..Assuming an energy intensity of 7.3 GJ of fuel and 3.2 GJ of electricity per ton, the average for

The LPG stove (below left) is in an urban slum in 1977 Swedish designs (17).Sao Paulo. The fiv&-pot stove (below right) serves " Assuming an energy intensity of 44 GJ of tuel per ton of nitrogen in ammonia, the value witha slngl&-family household in Xinbu, a rural village .steam ~eforming of natural gas in.a new fert!lizer plant (40).. .in Guangdong Province In southern China, The AssumIng a.25-percent reduction In energy IntensIty, owing to InnovatIons such as the use ofthree units on the left are for wood firing. The two advanced dIesel engInes.

on the right have been modified for firing with gas.

.-:::..:.?:. ~ -::..:..- -=--:.- -.

:-,.-' ~-.~-~.-- AMBIO l"~~ 193

cated in Tahle ~ are commerciallv avail- PER CAPITA ENERGY USE RATES FOR COOKINGahle todav. a few are still in an advanced 12stage of development. -~

The average automotive fuel economyspecified for this scenario is 3.0 liters per100 km (79 mpg). This fuel economy could I

be achieved by installing an advancedadiabatic diesel engine with turbocom- 00

pounding in an average-sized new U.S. ~ 0automobile (1,300-1,400 kg), along with ~other energysaving features based on ex- a:isting technology (reduced aerodynamic ~ 0 -drag, low rolling resistance tires, and con- g l;j ~ ~tinuously variable transmission). Resear- ~ ~ ~ ichers at the Cummins Engine Company u. & l;j ffihave advanced a design for a 1,360 kg, a o. --~ ~ ~- -

00f .II> '" <:I -'" '" '"our to five passenger car with these fea- z ~ ~"in a ~ <t

tures (15)-a car that could be commer- ~ -.=. ~ ffi -~cially available within a decade. Alterna- 0 -~ 00

tively, a lighter weight (775 kg) four to fivepassenger car with this fuel economy couldbe built using only present-day tech- 0nologies-reduced aerodynamic drag, low., .rolling resistance tires direct injection Figure 2. Per-caplta energy use rates for cookIng. For both wood stoves anddiesel eng' d i. 1 .bl stoves involving high-quality energy carriers, the per-capita energy use rate fort ..Ine ('I~ )n con Inuous y vana e cooking is expressed in watts. The wood-consumption rate is also given in tonsraThnsmlsslon , of dry wood per year, Assuming 1 ton = 18 GJ, 1 ton per year = 570 watts (31).

e energy performance assumed forsteel-making in our scenario is also charac-teristic of advanced technologies. Specifi-cally, it is assumed that the energy per- -

fonnance for steel-making is the averagefor the Elred and Plasmasmelt processesunder development in Sweden (17, 18).Despite the potential for energy savings of50 percent or more with these advancedtechnologies, the major industrial interestin either case.s ot. -.n sTable 4. Final energy use scenario for a developing country in a warm climate, with amenities (except for

h R th .1. n. Ihn energy.sa l vfl g a- space heating) comparable to those in the WE/JANZ' region in the 1970s, but with currently best available

suc. .a er, It IS In t e potentia or re or advanced energy utilization technologies.duCIng overall costs and environmentalpr?blems associated with steelmaking: by Average Rate of Energy Use (Watts per Capita)beIng able to use powdered ores (concen- Actl EI I .

F I T t It ) d . 1 . h h . I Vlty ectr City ue 0 a-rates Irect y, Wit out avlng to agg om-

erate the ore into sinter or pellets; by be- Residentialing able to use ordinary steam coal instead Cooking 34of the much more costl y coke. and by in- Hot Water, 29

..' RefrIgeratIon 14t~gratlng what are now separate opera- Lights 4tlons. TV 3

The other technologies highlighted in Clothes Washer 2this scenario are described elsewhere (18). Subtotal 51 34 85While not all these technologies are yet Commercial 22 -22commercially available, no "far-out" tech- Transportationnologies requiring major technological Auto~obiles 107breakthrou ghs are involved We believe Intercity Bus, 26

...Passenger TraIn 5 32that the entire set of technologIes or a set Urban Mass Transit 2 8of technologies with similar energy per- Air Travel. 21fonnance values could be commercialized Truck FreIght 32.RaIl FreIght 5In a matter of a decade or so. Water Freighl (incl. bunkers) 50

But is this scenario relevant to the situa-tion in developing countries? Does this Subtotal 12 276 288

scenario provide meaningful insights re- Manufacturinggarding the future course of develo pment Raw Steel 28 77

'. Cement 6 54for developing countnes? Is the strong em- Primary Aluminum 11 26phasis on energy efficiency a desirable goal Paper and Paper~ard 11 24 .for developing countries? And is it desir- NItrogenous FertIlizer -36

bl ..Other" 65 212a e or even realistiC to suggest that de-veloping countries seriously consider the S~btotal. 121 429 550development of technolo g ies not Y et com- ~rl,culture, 4 41 45.

...Mining. Construction -59 59merclally avatlable anywhere In the world?These are questions to which we now turn TOTALS 210 839 1049our attention.

Notes.Here WE/JANZ stands tor Western Europe. Japan. Australia. New Zealand. and South Africa. For

THE ME the activity levels indicated in Table 2 and the energy intensities given in Table 3.ANING OF THE ACTIVITY .This is the residual.

LEVELS FOR OUR SCENARIO .It has been estimated that at Sweden's 1975 level of GDP. final energy demand in manufacturing...would have been 1.0 kW (half the actual value), had advanced technology been used (17). The

<?ur an~l~sls here IS not Intended to estab- value assumed here is 45% less. since the average per capita GDP was 45% less for W. EuropeIIsh activity level targets for developing than tor Sweden in 1975. Also. 22% of final manufacturing energy use is assumed to becountries, to be achieved at some future electriCIty. the Swedish value for 1975date. Indeed, the appropriate mix and

194 ~IBIO VOL I' ~o -1-5

.able 5. Per-capita activity levels for selected activities in developing countries-for 1975, for the hypothetical scenario developed here, and as projected for

2030 in the IIASA scenarios.

.Activl1y Activlly Index 1975 Activily Levels' Actlvlly Levels for the Actlvily Levels for the IIASA'

for Developing Countries Scenario of Tables 2-4 Low Scenario High Scenario

Domestic Liter of Hot WaterHot Water per Capita per Day 9" 50 20" 28"

Service Sector m' of CommercialDevelopment Floor Space per Capita 1.1 54 2.6 3.2

Auto Use Number of Automobilesper Capita 0.0107 0.19 0.047 0.081

Air Travel Passenger-km per Capitaper Year 14 345 82 217

Truck Freight Ton-km per Capita 1)er Year 545 1495 1378 2993

Rail Freight Ton-km per Capita per Year 189 814 625 1063

Steel Production Kg per Capita per Year 21' 320 64 125

Cement Production Kg per Capita per Year 77' 479 N.A. (d) N.A. (d)

Nitrogenous Kg of Contained N

t!:enilizer per Capita per YearProduction 3' 26 N.A. (d) N.A. (d)

Notes.These are population-weighted average values for all developing countries except the centrally planned Asian economies Unless indicated otherwise,

the parameters shown are from the IIASA study (20). End-use analysis was not carried out for the centrally planned Asian economies in the IIASA study.

" The parameters presented in the IIASA analysis are convened from kcal per capita to liters of hot water per capita. assuming the water is heated by30

degrees Celsius., From Reference 41.

d Not available. Steel is the only basic material for which demand levels are explicitly indicated in the IIASA scenarios.

levels of activities for the future in de- The prominent role of the industrial sec- certainly true that Western Europe has

veloping countries may well have to be tor in our scenario-accounting for 58 per- largely completed the infrastructure build-

different to be consistent with overall cent of total final energy use, compared to ing period of its own development.

goals. 28, four and 37 percent for India, Tan- The infrastructure-building period of

Rather the purpose of our analysis is to zania, and Brazil, respectively, or, alterna- development is characterized by rapid

sho:"" that it is possible not only to meet tively 26, six, and 1.75 times as much ener- growth in the production and consumption

basIc human needs but also to provide im- gy per capita as in these same countries of basic materials such as steel and ce-

provements in living standards that go far today (Figure 3)-indicates that our ment, which provide the building blocks

beyond the satisfaction of basic needs, scenario is consistent with considerable in- for construction of factories, commercial

without significant increases in per capita frastructure building. Nevertheless, this buildings, roads, railroads, bridges etc. ..:

energy use. Thus energy supply availabili- question deserves close attention, as it is During this period the production and use

ty as such need not be a fundamental con-

straint on development.

The value of our scenario as a "thought

experimenr' in making this point would be ~ FUEL

less if it turned out there are energy-inten-

sive activities that are likely to be impor- 1200 1 II ELECTRICITY

tant for developing countries in the comingdecades and that are characterized by ac- ~ INDIA 1049

tivity levels in excess of those assumed forjthis scenario. 1000 ~ TANZANIA 90S We believe that in most instances activi- ~. .~1

~y l.evels ,,:,ould not be higher than those ~ BRAZil .

IndIcated In our scenario. In all energy- ~

using sectors the activity levels are far in ~ 800 ~ 1 KW SCENARIO

excess of average values for developing a: ~countries today (Table 5) and in most in- ~ 80

stances in excess of values implicit in well- ()

known forecasts of future energy require- ffi 600 58 5S7

ments for developing countries over the a.1 88 ?ext 40 to 50 years. For example. the activ- U") 37)

Ity levels for developing countries in the ~

1981 energy projections for 2030 by the ~ 400 363

International Institute for Applied Sys- Iterns Analysis (IIASA) at Laxenburg. Aus- 99tria (19, 20) are generally far less than <9O)

those associated with our scenario (Table 200 ;6 ~

5), ev<:n though per capita final energy use 6S) ~

leve1s In the IIASA scenarios are com par- .

able to or much higher than the value for .

our scenario-developing country average -

values for 2030 of 1..0 and 1.7.kW for the 0 INDUSTRY RESIDENTIAL TRANSPORTATION I T B 1

IIASA low and hIgh scenanos respec-. 1 , TOTALtlve y.

A critical question is whether at inter- Figure 3. Final energy use per-capita by sector and ener~y carrier, for India in 1978 (32), Tanzania in 1981 : mediate times. during the intensive '"in- (33), Brazil in 1982 (34), and the 1 kW scenarIo presented In Table 4. For the three sets of columns on the ~.:

frastructure-bu.ld.ng" h f d I left, the numbers at the tops are the sectoral shares (in percent) of total final energy use. For the four .

ment th I I P ase 0 eve op- columns on the right, which give total final energy use per capita by carrier for India (I), Tanzania (T),

h. ere wl?uld be need for more ener- Brazil (B), and the 1 kW scenario (1), the numbers at the tops are the total final energy use per capita,

g~ t an wh~t IS now required to support while the numbers on the columns are the carrier shares (in percent). The numbers in parentheses on

t e economies of modern Europe. these columns give the non-commercial energy share (in percent) of total final energy use.

AMBIO 1"~' 195

~

co' 600 6J

~ ,1' I~ 500 5a...: ~te, Tho numb't. ., the r"" ..f O,1th h.,r~ J~n repr"..nr the """trIIM'tl..". '0 m..,,-0 f."""i". fi".1 en.,s:y d"',1nd (In STEEL2- pe",.nt) , 400 400 .c A""O~;;A ~W JOO .../- ; -:-\ C)0 ~ -, '" .".-:-"., "00 .c ---' ". ..

~ '"'300 / """ / '..7' .30 ..,:J lsn Co " / ' ..' .' ~.oJ ~., ~-< , : J > (D - / :' ...~ 'r »-'6 100 200 ",.".' :::'f ET~E 20a: ,-' ...'

/ ~:5 ' C;c.ORtNE ,.." -

.oJ J , L - 0 lsn , .,.,.,0 CI.y, (:1... 100.../ , PAPE;J 10

ffi ~-::;:.:.::' Q. ~-""(/I Inn

~ 0 a:J 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 19850 5 Food

~ Figure 5. Basic materials use in Western Europe. The data are three-yearS running averages of aggregates of apparent consumption for France, Ger-~ 0.1 Orher .~ many. and the U.K. The ammonia data are for France and Germany only

:n '.j) ,n '.n (35). The arrows point to the scale to be used in quantifying each curve,CONTRIBUTION TO MANUFACTURING VALUE ADDED (PERCENT)

Figure 4. The final energy intensify of manufacturing vs. manufacturingvalue-added for the United States in 1978. Here the value-added measure usedIs Gross Product Originating (GPO) by Industry. The sum of GPO values for allactivities in the economy equals the Gross National Product (21).

of these materials will tend to grow much Iy in industrialized countries with market sume between 1,310 and 1,660 kWh perfaster than the economy as a whole (21). economies. Their relevance to developing year (22). By comparison, the average

Because the basic materials processing countries is an issue of considerable con- consumption of new units in 1983 in theindustries are so energy-intensive- troversy. Three questions have been raised US was 1,150 kWh per year, and the mostaccounting for most industrial energy use concerning such technologies: First, can efficient model available in the US, intro-even in highly industrialized countries like emphasis on energy conservation be jus- duced commercially in March 1985, was athe U.S. (Figure 4)-industrial energy use tified in countries that are so poor that 490-liter unit requiring 750 kWh per year

-would typically grow much more rapidly they have little energy to save? Second, (23).than GNP during this period. even if there were significant energy con- Even poor households dependent large-

However, the absolute levels of basic servation opportunities in poor countries, Iy on non-commercial energy and havingmaterials production and use are not likely would not the pursuit of these oppor- few if any modern amenities tend to useto be higher during the infrastructure- tunities imply technological dependency energy inefficiently. As we have alreadybuilding period than in the beginnings of on industrialized countries, since much of pointed out, the poor who depend onthe post-industrial phase (e.g., the mid- the needed energy-efficient technology is wood for cooking consume three to 101970s for Western Europe), because al- not now manufactured in developing coun- times as much energy as those who havethough basic materials playa diminishing tries? Third, in light of the extra invest- access to modern energy carriers (Figurerelative role in economic activity as the ment usually required to obtain improve- 2). For the urban poor who buy wood oreconomy matures, these materials con- ments in energy efficiency, is not more charcoal for their cooking, this inefficiencytinue to play an increasing absolute role for energy-efficient end-use technology inap- implies a large expense. In Bangalore, In-a long time thereafter, as wider uses are propriate for developing countries, where dia, for example, the poorest 15 percent offound for these materials (21). capital is so scarce? all households spend 17 percent of income

The history of the per-capita use of sev- We now address these questions and on fuelwood (24). For the rural poor, fuelen important basic materials (both tradi- show why we believe that investments in inefficiency implies a great deal of timetional and modern) for some Western energy efficiency are not only relevant to committed to wood gathering (especiallyEuropean countries is shown in Figure 5. developing countries but essential to by women and children) that could other.The values chosen for the per capita con- bringing about rapid development. wise be occupied more productively and.sumption rates of basic materials in our that is increasing in many parts of thescenario are from the period near the What Is There To Save? world, as deforestation makes wood sup-peaks of these curves. While it is true that the rich industrialized plies scarcer.

This analysis thus suggests that it is feas- countries can save far more energy than .ible to achieve a standard of living in de- developing countries, it does not follow Where WIll The Technology Come From?vel oping countries anywhere along a con- that there is little energy to save in de- To the extent that energy-efficient end-usetinuum from the present one up to a level vel oping countries. The elites, who ac- devices are not now available in deve10p-of amenities typical of Western Europe count for most commercial energy use in ing countries, these devices must either betoday, without departing significantly from developing countries, have energy-wasting imported, or a local manufacturing capa-the average energy use per capita for de- habits very similar to those of citizens of bility must be established.veloping countries today, depending on industrialized countries-and often there Those developing countries with littlethe level of energy efficiency that is em- is even greater waste in the developing industrial infrastructure may have to relyphasized. country. on imported technologies, at least for a

Consider two-door refrigerators that are while. But these countries would have tonow becoming popular among the elites in import the conventional. less-efficient

THREE QUESTIONS RAISED Brazil. The new Brazilian units of this type technologies anyway. For these countriesTo date most new energy-efficient end-use are smaller (340 to 420 liters) than typical the issue is whether the increased foreigntechnologies have become available main- units in the US (about 500 liters) and con- exchange expenditures often required for

196 A~IBIO VOL 1.1 ~o .1-5

---

.the more efficient end-use technoll)gies ,'eloping count~' should he distinguished THE RELEVANCE OF ADVANCED, can be justified, In this instance it is impor- from the prohlem of the o"erall limited TECHNOLOGIES

tant to calculate the fo~e,ign exchange im- supply of capi,tal, , There are good reasons to believe that inpacts of the more effIcient technologies Under a wide range of cIrcumstances. some instances it would be desirable for'fro,m the perspective of the entire system the extra capital requir~men~s for im- developing c~untries to commercializeof Improved end-us~ technology plus ener- proved end-use te~hnolog,les will be more advanced energy-saving technologies suchgy s~pply. because In ~any cases the extr,a than offset by capital sa,:,lngs for lowered as those highlighted in our l-kW scenario,f?relgn exchange !equ~red for a more effl- energy nee~s. An anaIY~I~ by Geller of t~e The energy savings potential of advancedclent end-use devlce,wllI he more than ?ff- ~nergy-sa':lng opport~mtles for ~he Brazll- technologies is often far greater than whatset by redul:ed foreign exc~ange requlre- Ian, electrIcal s.ector IS suggestive ,of the can be achieved through the modificationments f,or new energy supplies. savings pot~ntlal. Geller h,as estimated of existing technologies.

The Imp?rtance of a systems approach that for a (dl,sco~nted) totall~vestment of Those technological innovations that~o the forel~n exc,hange problem may b.e some $4 ~llIton In more efficlen~ end-use society adopts must be attractive to com-Illustrated ~,Ith a, IIgh~ bu.lb. In an analysIs te,chnologles (for, ~ore. ef~cle~t re- pensate for the dislocations that oftenof the BrazIlian sltuatl?~ It has been shown fnge~ators: st.reet lightIng. lightIng In com- accompany the introduction of new tech-

.~hat for each d.ollar a citIzen spend~ on ':1~w merclal bulldlng~, and motors, and t~e de- nology. Historically, this has been such aInc~n~escent IIg~t bulbs, the e.lectnc ~tlilty ployment of van.able speed motor dnv~s), powerful phenomenon in the industrial~ust Invest $10 In hydroelectrIc supplies to It would be f~aslble to defer construction sector that process innovations generallylight t.he bulb (25). For a country that of some 21. gIgawatts electric .(GW(e)] of have led to marked improvements in ener-

.must, Instead, rely on the more costly th.er- new .electrlcal. supply cap.aclty, .corres- gy efficiency even during periods of con-mal. power sources, the correspondIng pondlng to. a discounted caplt~1 ~avl~gs for stant or declining energy prices, whenenergy supply costs would be larger. new supplies of some $19 billion m the energy has not been a major concernAt the macro-economic level, newener- period 1986 to 2<XX> (22), The resulting .

gy supplies for developing countries re- capital savings could be used to speed up 4000quired $25 billion of foreign exchange in the development process in other areas. ."1982-over one-third of the foreign ex- Not only are investments in energy effl- ~:;change required for all kinds of invest- ciency relevant for developing countries, ;,ments (1). Clearly, to the extent that net but also they are often even more relevantforeign exchange requirements can be re- than for industrialized countries. This 3duced by importing more efficient end-use perhaps counter-intuitive result is illus-technologies, as alternatives to conven- trated in Figure 6, which compares, for thetional end-use technologies, a developing Brazilian situation, the cost of saving onecountry would be better off. kW with investments in efficient compact ~

In more advanced developing countries, fluorescent light bulbs with the cost of the .;:the manufacturing capability for many effi- extra hydro-electric supply expansion that ~ 2

cient end-use devices could be readily de- would be required if incandescent bulbs .".veloped, if manufacturers believed there were used instead (25). The cost shown inwere sufficient markets. each case, as a function of the discount

In India this has already happened in the rate, is the discounted present value of allcase of automobiles. High efficiency oil- required investments over a 50-year life 1000using technoiogy is of crucial importance cycle. This figure shows that at a 10-per-to India, which spent more than 80 percent cent discount rate the supply expansionof its foreign-exchange earnings in 1981 on cost per kW is about three times the cost ofoil imports (2). This high cost has moti- saving one kW by investing in more effi-vated a shift to more fuel-efficient cars. cient bulbs. What is perhaps more interest- 00 20While typical five-passenger cars on the ing is the fact that the higher the discount DISCWNT RATE ("toPER YEAR)road in India have a fuel economy of 10 to rate the greater the benefit of the energy- .11 liters per 100 km (21 to 24 mpg) typical efficient light bulbs. There are two reasons Figure 6. The dIscounted present values 01 the

.'. cost 01 peaking electricity produced via a hydro-new, domestIcally manufactur.ed five- for ~hlS result:. .electric power system and the cost 01 saving .passenger .ca~s have fuel economIes of the FIrst, efficient .lIght bulbs, lI.ke most electricity via the Installation 01 efficient compact .::order of SIX liters per 100 km (40 mpg). other energy-effiCIent technologIes, tend fluorescent IIghtbulbs. -

In the case of Brazil there is strong evi- to have lifetimes much shorter than energy The costs are for electricity delivered to or saveddence that Brazilian manufacturers would supply facilities-typically in the range of at tha household.be able to manufacture a wide range of two to 20 years, versus 20 to 50 years for All capital Investments over the estimated so-energy-efficient, electricity-using tech- most energy supply facilities. Investments year IIle of the hydroelectric pow~r plent are In-nologies (refrigerators, efficient lighting in conservation equivalent to new supply CIUdedh .Th ct e a iss t ul med f hYdr loel tect thrlc t powe ldr Cbe°s bts lit...arec arB ers co newpen s a wou u

technologIes, heat pumps, motors, motor expansIon are spread out over tIme. In Brazil. Specifically It Is assumed that the "over-control devices) in just a few years, if there Therefore, the present value of the needed night" construction ~ost 01 the hydroelectric laclll-were sufficient markets for such devices investments over the life cycle of the ener- ty Is $1,170 per kW 01 Installed capacity, that tha

0 (22). Moreover, it is ironic that the most gysupply facility they would displace tends plant Is constructed over a 6-yeer perlod,andthatefficient refrigerator/freezer available in to decline rapidly with an increasing dis- the plant Is paid lor with six equal payments overthe U.S. achieves its efficiency in large count rate (25). In sharp contrast, the in- this construction .P8r1od. To provide 1 kW 01 peak-pan by the use of a compressor imported vestment required for energy supply ex- Ing demand r~ulres 1.16 kW 01 Installed hydro-

.from Brazil (26). The Brazilian manufac- pansion tends to increase with the discount electric capacity, ~o allow lor a 16-percent reserve. I d h margin. The total Installed capacity required to

t:urer mvo ve exports a hIgh efflctency rate, bec~use of Interest c arg~s accu~u- provide 1 kW 01 residential baseload demand Isline an~ markets.a less efficient product lated dunng th~ long constructIon perIod. 1,45 kW, when allowance Is made lor 20 percentdomestIcally, partially because of the wide The net result IS that the benefits of con- transmission and distribution losses.range of design operating voltages and the servation investments tend to increase It is assumed that transmission lacilities lasting~onsiderable voltage fluctuations at Brazil- rapidly with the discount rate. This means 30 years cost $710 per kW, Some 01 this transmls-Ian houses. Ti)e less efficient compressor is that from a societal perspective, invest- slon cost could be avoided II new generetlngmore tolerant of voltage variations. ments in energy efficiency improvement capaclty.could be delerred via Investments In

look better the higher the discount rate. more efficient light bulbs...It IS assumed that 13-watt compact fluorescent

Th Pr bl r C . Sc .We are led therefore to a rather surprising li ght bulbs lasting 6 000 hours and costing$9 20e 0 emo apltal arclty I .' ., ffi ' " , .,

..resu t, Investments In energ) e Iclenc~ Im- each replace 4O-watt Incandescent bulbs lastingIt IS certaInly true that consumers must provement will often make even more 1,000 hours and costing $0.50 each. It Is assumedusually.pay mor.e for the purchase of ener- sense in capital-short developing countries that the light bulbs are used live hours per day,gy-efflclent de:-'lces. But the difficulty the with many pressing needs than in industri- including the early evening hours, so that theyconsumer has m obtaining capital in a de- alized countries. contribute to the peak electricity demand (25).

"~IBI() I'/!\~ 197

-_c_-- -

Tahle f1 illustrates this phenomenon for the veloped and relatively low-cost hydroelec- ment path of the North hut should pursue~.S. v;here energy prices were generally tric resources. v;hile most industrialized new directions and assume the risks of in-constant or falling in the decade~ immedi- countries must turn to more co~tly thermal novating in some area~ of pt)tentially highately preceding the 1973 oil cri~is. po\\.er sources for increased electrical pay-off.

In this era of high energy costs it can be capacity. Similarly. biomass is a promising. .expected that this phenomenon will per- source of chemical fuels for many develop- ExIstence ~roof of Technologicalsist-that the pursuit of socially attractive ing countries. requiring decentralized de- LeapfroggInginnovations will often lead to significant velopment strategies quite unlike the cen- While there are many theoretical argu-energy efficiency improvements, even if tralized strategies that have been pursued ments favoring "technological leapfrog-the new technologies are not selected spec- by the fossil-fuel-rich countries. ging," whereby new technologies are in-ifically for their energy-saving features. In- Third. human needs are quite different troduced first in developing countries. thedeed there is a wide range of promising in the South from those of the North. be- idea is still contrary to the conventionaladvanced energy end-use technologies that cause of climatological differences, be- wisdom that new technology must be in-could be brought to commercialization cause of different cultural aspirations, and troduced in the industrialized countries.over the next decade or so and offer major especially because the satisfaction of basic because only these countries have the in-advantages of capital savings, environmen- human needs and infrastructure-building frastructure and the risk-absorbing capaci-tal protection, materials savings, etc., in must be given prominent focus in the eco- ty that is needed for introducing new t,ech-addition to energy savings (18). nomic planning of the South, dictating nology. But technological leapfrogging is

Despite the promise of major energy patterns of production markedly different not just a theoretical construction. It hassavings associated with the adoption of from those of the North. been tried on various occasions in the past-advanced technologies, it is generally Developing and industrialized countries -sometimes with success, and other timesthought that the process of commercializ- are at different phases in their industrial not. There are lessons in the historical rec-ing advanced technologies is an inapprop- development. In the industrialized coun- ord, some of which we now review.riate activity for developing countries, tries, areas of greatest growth and innova- Ethanol-Success in Brazil and Failurewhich do not have the institutional infras- tion are electronics, information tech nolo- in Kenya: The Brazilian alcohol programtructure needed for technological innova- gy. communications, medical technology, in 1984 produced about 10 billion liters oftion and which cannot afford the risk-tak- etc.-generally areas involving high value- ethanol from sugar cane and replaceding of innovation when there are so many added fabrication and finishing activities. about 60 percent of the gasoline thatpressing development needs to attend to. Both a shift in consumer preferences away would have been required in the absenceYet, as we shall now argue, there are many from materials-intensive goods and the oil of the program. Brazil has also developedreasons to question this conventional price shocks of the 1970s have curbed cars that run on pure alcohol, nearlywisdom. growth in the demand for basic materials 600,000 of which were sold in 1983.

in industrialized countries (21), as shown The cost of ethanol has been estimatedRationale For Seeking New Technologies for Western Europe in Figure 5. This stag- to be $50-56 per barrel (1983 U.S. dollars)While less risk would be involved if the nation in demand provides a poor climate of gasoline replaced (27), when the sub-technologies adopted by developing coun- for innovation in the basic materials indus- sidies are remove~ and a true exchangetries were those that have already been tries, even though existing capital stocks rate is used (that IS, a rate based on thecommercialized in industrialized coun- have been made largely obsolete by the parity value of exported goods). This costtries, several considerations weigh against energy price increases of the last decade. is co.mpetitiv~ with gasoline produced inthis alternative. Thus in industries of crucial importance BrazIl from Imported crude at the 1981

First, many of the industrial tech- for infrastructure-building, the North is world oil price, although it is six to 17~ nologies now being commercialized in the not innovating at a pace sufficient to pro- percent higher than t~e c<;>st of &asoline

North are capital-intensive and labor- vide for the needs of the South. based on the 1984 oil pnce dunng. ~hesaving-characteristics that are not well- Finally, the potential for rapid growth in world-wide oil glut.. But t~e. Braziliansuited to industrial activity in most of the the demand for basic materials in the ethanol program provides additional bene-South, where labor is cheap and abundant South suggests that some countries of the fits of rural development,. employmentand capital is costly and scarce. South may be more promising theaters for generation, incr.e~sed self-rellan~e, a!1d re-

Second, the comparative advantages in innovation in these areas than the coun- duced vulnerability to futu~e roses In thenatural resources are often quite different tries of the North, where demand is stag- worl? oi~ mark.et. Also, ~hlle. alco~ol pro-for many countries of the South from those nating. ductlon IS cam~d out pnmanly ~Ith loc~lof the North. In energy, many developing For all of the above reasons, developing currency, gasoline has to b~ paid for Incountries are blessed with largely unde- countries should not retrace the develop- hard currency. Because Brazil has a nega-

Table 6. Historical energy requirements per unit of output for selected malerials produced in the U.S. (42).

Soda Ash Ammonia Chlorine Hydraulic Cement"- .Raw Steel" .(Solvay Process) (Haber-Bosch Process) (Diaphragm Celis) (Wel and Dry Processes) (Changing Process Mix)

Date Energy Date Energy Date Electricity Dale Energy' Date Energy"(GJ/ton) (GJ/ton) (kWh/ton) (GJ/ton) (GJ/ton)

1868 60 1917 93.0 1916 4400 1947 10.3 1947 37.5 .1894 31 1923-50 81.0 1947-73 3300 1955 9.0 1954 32.4 ,1911 28 1965 52.0 1980 2400 1960 8.5 1962 30.01925 17 1972 46.5 1965 8.2 1971 27.81942 15 1978 41.2 1971 7.5 1980 27.0 .1970 14 1978 6.8

Ethylene Dichloride Ethylene Oxide Polyethylene

Date Index Date Index Date Index1967 100 1970 100 1956 1001973 15 1973 85 1973 40

1974 79 1975 18

Notes.Data for ali but the last entry are from reference 43..The 1978 data for cement are from Reference 44., Electricity requirements are counled at 3.6 MJ per kWh. ..The 1980 data for steel are from Reference 45.

198 A\IBIO VOL 1-1 NO -1-5

-

..'Iive halance of pa~ments that is expected is no\v hased on coke. 37 percent of Brazil- \vith the local resourcc hasc and to he

to persist for a numher of ycars. this means ian steel production (i.e.. ~.Ij million tons) supportive of the achievement of hroadthat oil imports must he financed \\.ith for- was has~d on charcoal in 191;3. This anom- development goals (e.g.. enhanced em-c:ign debt. aly reflects the scarcit~. of high quality cok- ployment generation. increased self-re-

The Brazilian ethanol program is espe- ing coal in Brazil. Coke-based steel pro- liance, rural development. etc.) as well ascially efficient in generating jobs-requir- duction in Brazil is based on mix of 80 to offer opportunities for direct cost reduc-ing an investment of only $6.()()() to percent imported coal and 20 percent high tion.$28.000 per job. \\.hich compares with an ash content domestically produced coking Despite its bj:nefits, leapfrogging shouldaverage of $~2,OOO for the Brazilian indus- coal. Though charcoal-based steel produc- not be regarded as a universal strategy fortrial sector. and $200.000 for the oil-refin- tion is widely viewed as anachronistic, it industrialization. It is appropriate onlying, petrochemical complex at Camarcari. produces a better quality steel because where a unique set of circumstances andIt is estimated that a total of 475,000 direct charcoal has less impurities than coke. capabilities offers great enough benefits tofull-time jobs (700.000 at the peak of the Brazilian charcoal-based steel is competi- justify the taking of risks. The challenge toharvesting season) in agricultural and in- tive in world markets because the industry planners in developing countries and todustrial activities will be generated by is far advanced in relation to the ancient the international assistance community is

.1985. along with another 100,000 indirect charcoal-based industry abandoned by the to identify and facilitate the exploitation ofjobs in commerce. services. and govern- now industrialized countries some 200 promising opportunities for leapfroggingment (27). years ago. and to support the development of the in-

In short the Brazilian program has been That charcoal-based steel with blast fur- frastructure needed for innovation., successful in meeting its technical objec- naces processing hundreds of tons of steel Promoting innovation in this manner

tives, reducing oil imports, and supporting per day can compete with coke-based fur- could greatly broaden the technologicalthe development process. naces processing thousands of tons per day choices available to developing countries

Success in this instance is more a reflec- is of great importance to developing coun- to meet their development goals. Andtion on the Brazilian technological de- tries generally. while technological success in one de-velopment process than on ethanol as an The technology is labor-intensive; it is veloping country will not necessarily beenergy source. An abundance of land re- well-matched to the resource base of the relevant to all developing countries, on bal-sources. a climate very favorable to sugar biomass-rich, fossil-fuel poor developing ance it is likely that innovations generatedcane, financial incentives to alcohol pro- countries; and the scale of its installations via leapfrogging will be more widely ap-ducers, a high tax on gasoline, and a long- often provides more appropriate incre- plicable in the South than innovationsterm history of experience with ethanol on ments in productive capacity in relation to coming from the North, since the countriesa modest scale were ingredients that the size of local markets than giant coke- of the South are often more similar to eachhelped foster technological success. based facilities. other in terms of their needs and

The Kenyan experience with ethanol The major cost item in charcoal-based capabilities than they are to countries ofhas not been as positive (28). Because of iron making is charcoal, which accounts the North.potential serious conflicts with food pro- for 65 percent of the total pig-iron produc-duction, Kenya cannot readily dedicate tion cost in Brazil. Charcoal for steel mak-significant amounts of agricultural land to ing is produced mainly from planted CONCLUSIONsugarcane as an ethanol feed stock. In- forests, primarily of eucalyptus and pine. Per-capita energy use in developing coun-'stead, Kenya has utilized the residual The total plantation area exceeded five tries near the present level would be ade-molasses of the sugar inudstry. This choice million hectares in 1983. quate to support a standard of livingis a dubious one, however, not only be- Technical developments relating to ranging from the present all the way tocause the economics of ethanol production charcoal-based steel production are ad- that of Western Europe today, dependingbased on gtolasses are much less favorable vancing at a rapid rate (Table 7). Planta- on the extent of the shift to modern energythan for sugarcane, but also because tion yield has roughly doubled over the carriers and the emphasis on energy-effi-molasses is a strong foreign-exchange last decade, and a further 50 percent in- cient end-use technology now availableearner and there is strong domestic de- crease in yield is expected. Over the last and on the commercialization of advancedmand for molasses in cattle and pig pro- decade charcoal yields from wood have energy-saving technologies.duction. In short, the Kenyan program is a improved about 20 percent, and still Modernization of the energy end-usecase of transfer of inappropriate technolo- another 10 percent increase is expected in system along the lines discussed in this ar-gy, with the situation made worse by poor the near term. At the same time charcoal ticle is technically and economically feas- iplanning. requirements for iron making have been ible and strategically desirable for poor

Charcoal Based Steel-Making in Brazil: declining. The net result of these improve- countries.In the industrialized countries coke began ments is that in the near future. the land An emphasis on energy-efficiency im-!o replac~ charcoal as a reducing agent for area required for a given level of steel provement and modern energy carriersIron-makIng at the middle of the 18th cen- production is expected to fall to just one- would make it possible to satisfy basic hu-tury, as a response to rising charcoal costs fifth of what was required in the 1970s man needs, to radically expand the indus-(29). The shift to coke led to much larger- (Table 7). trial infrastructure, and to allow for con-scale. iron-~aking blast furnaces than were ...siderable improvements in living stand-possible wIth charcoal, as coke has much Formulating LeapfroggIng StrategIes ards, beyond the satisfaction of basic

, ¥reater mechanical strength to resist crush- The above examples show that it is feasible needs, with little change in the overall per-mg under the load of the blast furnace to have technological leapfrogging in de- capita level of energy use. This use shouldchargcc:. veloping countries, but new technologies not obscure the challenge of bringing this

While most of the world's steel industry must be chosen carefully to be compatible about, however. Large amounts of capital

Table 7. Parameters relating to the annual production of one million tons of steel based on charcoal in Brazil. (46)

Wood Yield on Wood-to-Charcoal Specific Charcoal Required Area Investment RequiredPlantations Conversion Rate Consumption for Plantations to Establish Forest(tons/ha/vr)" (m'/ton) (m'/ton pig iron) (1,000 ha) (1,000 US$)

19705 12.5 0.67 3.5 336 201.600 ..1980s 25 0.80 3.2 128 76.800Near future 37.5 0.87 2.9 71 42,600

Notes.Air dry tons (25-percent moisture).

AMBIO. 1'1115 199

u'ulunt:rt:quirt:utonringan"uta,hiftt,' I~ 'Ir",I"r",ll.ln~ln."I,'llh"",'I",II""""""h,,r,, .\nn',uIR""o".,'/I:"'o'rll,!I.::""-.~.~::'I"'~'mout:rn t:nt:rgy carrit:r, and to .:fficit:nt .,n" ,"."'n In 1.1"1" :: .1' """'~ "h.,r,":I"rNI",~1 ..' Fr"nk '.'n IlirPCI. I .\ (r.m'I',.r',I1I"n fno'r::,

It h ~- 1 ,I 1.. 11 I \\"'I..',nl'ur.'pc.lr.:.I.."ra""',II'I",mrth,,\\I: IJo',nunol.Pl.,EESR" r .'rt'" 1111("nl.:rmr

.:nu-u't:.:crn'ogyanul""ulltl.:rt:-I\'Z " "" I" J \ I " :.

r"!".""""'I"rnur..,,,,.lr,ln.lI'tr,II.1 .cn"rg,;ondEmlr..nm""lal~ludl",.Pnn""t.."qulrt:u Infrastructurt:. ,.nJ "," Z,:,Ii.lndl l:ni'"r,il...141'11

But our analvsis suggests strongly that I.' R R ~k.lr and R..~ Kam.. I(.ummln, I:ngin" .14 Th""u..ro R B".:k, Imprl"""""'" /II f.n,'rll' 1-:/1/.for a widt: range-of plal:i~ible sets of-'lctiYity ,,'mr..n, <...,Ium"u' , In,dianal and J , \Y..,..I ..",n..,' "f Inolu"rial 1-:1"..,r"..h,',n,..,,1 I'r;,;'.., "',.1.1 ' .'."'.- I:';ASAL""i,R"",ar.:hC"nl"r,('I"""land.Oh"'I. tR"p"rlpr"par"dfl'rlh"Olli.:"..IEI"ctr...:h"mi.e\e s and for a wide r .Inge of end-use .-Id,.",..,,01 .-Id",h"".. /)/..,..1 /:nll""" ftJr 1"1"..nll"r car Proj"cl ~Ianalt"m"nl. Are,mn" :';ali..naltechnologie~, it would be less costly to pro- (""r,. P"p"r:';.. X-II)'I.1-1,.in s..ci"t~,ol Aut~'moli.." La""ralor~, A~L 6EP~I-77-2. J:'nu.r~, 1'177)vide energv services using the more effi- Eng,n""r'., .-IoIlaha/u EJIIi/n.." II'Jrld.ll,d.. R... ,/(1 D A W.ilzm.n.., ai" F..nili:..r fra," Coal. P.pcr

, d' hi' h 'd ,"..",SP-:-7I,(I'IX-I), pr"par"dh..th" Di..isionuICh"micaID".."I..p-clent en -use t.ec no, ogles t an ~o provi e In Frank ",m Ilipp.:1 and Barhara L"..i. R..,vurc..s m"nl. T"nncss"c V"II.:.. Aulhoril.., ~Iuscl.: Shual"the same servIces wIth conventional. less and Cons..r..atiOJI, 10, 103-12-1 ( 1'!II3) Alahama. and pr.:s.:ntcd "t th.: Facull\ In'titut" unefficient end-use technologies and in- 17 P SI.:.:n, T B Johansson. R Fr.:driks",n. and E. C".I Production T.:chnultllt.. and L'tiiizalion. O.kcreased energy supplies. B,'gr.:n. E.n..r~'.-for "'hat a/III Ho" .1/1.'ch:' (~i".:r Ridg.: A,s'lCiatcd Uni"'.:.rsili.:.. Oak Ridg",

, ..Forlag.SI'lCkhulm, I'IXI) (In Swcd.,hl Sum- T.:nn.:""c,(Jul..21-Aueu'tll.I'I7XI.While we have not dealt explIcitly here mariz.:d in T. B Johan,son, p, Stc.:n. E Bogr.:n, -II l:nit.:d Nations. 11/79/811 S,a,i"ical ",arho"k.

with the energy supply implications of an .nd R Frcdriks,on. Scitnct, 219, 355 (191'3) (Unitcd N"liuns, N.:w York. 19XI).energy.efficient future for developin2 IX J~)s':,Gold.:mh.:rg. Thomas B J.','hanssun. Amul~a -12 Roh.:rt V. Ayrcs, Final R':p',rt un Futur" En.:rg~

(, 't' If'd h' h' ~ K~R.:ddy."ndR()hcrtHWlillams,En..r~."for Consumpllonhythclndu,triaICh"micalslndustrv~oun nes. I, IS se -evi ent t at t e ~eem- t' S,."ainablt World. "'x,k m.nuscripl (SIC 2M), Appcndix 10 Th.. Cht/llicals IndILSrr':.Ingly formidable supply problems de- Summ.rizcd in Annual R..,i.." of En..r~v, 10. ..ul. 5 of 'I. in IndlLSlrial Entr,~.' Prodllctivit.v Pro/"scribed at the outset would be greatly /113-/1&'1 (19t15) .tCI Final Rtporl: I?r.:parcd by. En.:rg~ a~d En..iron-eased in an ener gy -effic'ent world The 1'1 En.:rg~ S~'slemsProgram Group. In!.:rnalll,nalln- mcnl,,1 AnalysIs. Inc.. Arlln~lon, \", for th"

, I I .stllul.: for Appllcd Systcm' Analys,s. En..r~v In u Asst. s.:crclary for Conserv"llon and R.:n.:wahlc

lower the level of aggregate demand, the Finir.. IVorld A Global S_..SltlnS Allalvsis. (Ballin- Encrgy, (U,S. D.:partm.:nt of Encr~.., DOE:;CS'greater the degree of flexibility in supply gcr. Camhrid~c. l'Jt!I), ../()151-1. Fcbru"ry, 191!3). ..

planning, With lower demand levels it be- 20 Arshad ~I Khan and AIt'IS Holzi. E,'oilitloJI 1).1 -13 Th.: Confcrcnc.: Board. Elltrg." Consulnp'ion in." Fuulrt Entrg.v Dtmallds ull 1030 In DI.ff..rt'" ,\Iullufaclur/ng. a rep"rt to the Encrg~ Policy Proj-

comes possible to avoid ove~dependence lI'orld R..gions All Asst'SSJn..'11 ;lla,lt for Ih.. T"o ':CI of Ihc Ford Foundation. (Ballingcr, Cam-on the more troublesome optIons. II.-ISA Sc..narios, (R.:port No. RR.M2.1-I 01 thc hridgc. 197.\).

Indeed. we have shown elsewhere that Int.:rnationalln'tilut.: for Appli.:d Sy'tcms An"I~'- -1-1 J T. DiK"ou. 1978-79 .\Iilltrals Yearbook, Vol-

via the P 't f f f ..' ,is. L",.:nhurg. Austria, April. I'IK2} Th.: com- UJllt I: ,\Ittals and j\1intrals, (U.S Burcau of, ,U,rSUI 0, energy e ICle~C} p"ri",n, indical.:d in Tahlc 5 ar.: fur thu,.: acli..ity ~Iin.:s. I'I!!II}.

strateg.les In IndustrIalIzed and developIng 1.:\.:1, ,uffici"ntl~ di,aggr"gal"d in Ih" IrASA -15 En.:rgy "nIl En"ironm"ntal Anal~si" IndlLSlriulCountrIes alike (18, 30) it is feasible to anal~,is 10 pcrmit a .cump.rison with o.ur ,c.:nariu Producril'i~' PrOjecT Final Rtport-l, pr.:parcd forremove energy as a constraint to develop- For Ihcothcr actlvlll':' Ilsl"d In T.hl~ ).an .:'pllclt th.: ASSI, Sccrclar~' for C,m"'f""IIOn "nd R.:n.:w-

t d I I I b I comp"nSl,n wIth thc IIASA sc.:nant'S " nul P',s- .hlc En"rgv. (US, Dcpartment of Energv. DOEImen an to evo ve ong term go a -ener- sibl.: CSi-ilJt51-1. Februarv. 191!3). .

gy strategies that are economically and en- 21. E D. Larson. R. H William" and D. Bi"nkow,- -16 Rodrigu.:s dc Almcid.. (Florcslal Acesita. S.A.,vironmentally sound and strategically se- ki. .l/altrial CollSump'ion Pau..rllS UJld Int/rL"rial Bclu Hurizont.:. Brazil). prc",nt.tion at thc Sec-

cure-energ t t . th t . h t .En..rg.'. D..mand ill Induslriali:..d COIIJllri..s, PUt ond EI,d-Us.. Oriented Global EJltrg). Workshop,

, y.S ra egles, a, In s or , are CEES R.:pon No. 17-1. C.:ntcr for Encrgy and Sao Paulo, Br"zil. (Jun.:. 1984).compatIble wIth the achievement of a sus- En,,'ironmcnlal Sludic,. Princ.:ton Uni".:rsilv.tainable world. Princcton, ~J.. 19t1-1 .

22. Ho"ard S Gellcr. Tht Potential for Eltctricil...Cons..nalion in Bra:il. Companhia En.:rgclica u.,Sao P"ulo, Sao Paulo. Brazil. 19K5.

23, Th.: Amcrican Council for an En.:rgv-EfficicnlEconomy, Tht /~/oSI Entrg Efficitnl Appliancts,

R f W"shinglon DC, Summcr 19M5.e erences and Notes 2-1 Amuly" K, N R.:ddy and B, Sudhakar R"ddy., I. Th.: World B"nk. Tht EJltrgy Tra/lSilion in Ot- Energy in a Slralificd Socicly: Ca'cstud~ of

vtloping CounTries. (World Band W.,hinglon DC. FIrewood .n Bangalorc. Economic and PolItIcal191!3, IVttkl.v. XVIII. October 8. (19M3).

2. Thc World Bank. World Dtv..lop"'tnl Rtporl 25 Ju-.;Goldcmberg .nd R. H William,. Th.. Eco-1984. Oxford University Press. 19!14 no,nlCS of Entrgy ConservatIon In Dtvtlopmg

3. In Tables 2.6 and 2.7 of R.:fcrencc 19. thc rcmain- Counlnts: Iht CoJlSumtr Versus tilt SocIetal Ptr-ing ultimatcly rccovcrablc oil and n"tural gas rc- sp..cti,t. PU/CEE.S Rcporl No, Itl9. Ccnlcr forsourccs in dcvcloping counlrics olh.:r than thosc in Encrgy and Envlronm.:nlal Sludlcs. Pnncclonthe Middlc Easl/Norlh African rcgion "rc csli- ., Unl..crsllY, Pnn~cto.n. N.J.. 1985, ..matcd (as of Ihc laIc 197Us) to be somc 133 TWY, ~6. Pn..alc communIcation to R, H. W,lliams from H, Jose Goldemberg is a professor at

-I. World Energy Confcrcncc. World Entrg,' Rt- S G.:llcr. Apnl. 19t15, .U I .fsources 1985-2000. (IPC Scicncc and Tcchnology 27 H".""rd S. G':!".:r. Annual Rtvit',' of Entr.I:)'. 10. the Institute of PhYSICS, n verslty 0

Prcss. 197t1), Gcological coal rcS('urccs in L.tin 13)-16-1 (19t1) Sao Paulo and president of the ener-Amcrica and in Asia outsidc of China arc cSli- 2t1. Phil O~Kecfe "nIl Don Shakow. A,nbio. 10. gy companies of Sao Paulo (CESP.mated 10 be insignificant, Thosc in Africa arc c'li- 213-21) (19t11), ELETROPAULO CPFL COMGAS).malcd to be only 1.\5 TWY. whilc coal rcscf"CS in 29. Charlcs K, Hydc. Ttchnologlcal Change and the "Africa arc cslimatcd to amount tu only 29 TWY Brilish Iron Indl"tr),. 1700-1870. (Princcton Uni- He may be reached at Alameda Mlnls-

5. Thc Carbon Dioxidc As",ssmcnl Commill':':. ,.:rslty Prcss. Pnncclon. Ncw Jcrscy. 1'177). tro Rocha Azevedo 25-8th floor,Changing Climalt. (Nalional Acadcmy of Sci- 30. Robert H Williams. Potential Rolts for Bioentrgy 01410-Sao Paulo, Brazil.cnces W"shinglon DC 19t13) In an Entrgy-Efficltnt World. (Amblo. thIs Issue). Th B J h . P f.'.. , 3 R H W.II .' P . I R I ' B ' E omas .0 ansson IS ro essor6, Ellis L, Armstrong, Hydraulic Rcsourccs. In Rt- I... I lams, Oltnfla 0 es Jor 10- ntrg,v In .ntwable Energy Resourcts: Iht Full Rtports to Iht an Energy.Efficitnl World. PU/CEES ~eport No, of Energy Systems AnalysIs at theConservation Commission of Iht World En..rgy 1:13, (Ccnlcr for Encrgy, and Envlronmenlal University of Lund. His address: En-Conference, IPC Scicncc and Technology Pr.:,s. Studl':s. PrInceton UnlvcrsllY. Pnncclon. N,J. vironmental Studies Program Ger-1978, 19t15). '

7. D, E, Earl. FOrtSI Entrgy and EconoJllic Dtvtlop- 32. Amul~a K N, Rcddy. An End-Ust .\t..thodology dagatan 13, S-22362 Lund, Sw~en.mtnl. (Clarcndon Prcss. Oxford. 1975), for Dtvtlopmtnt-Oritnltd Entrgy Planning in Dt- Amulya K. N. Reddy is Vice-Chairman

8. D, p, Ghai. A. R. Khan. E. L, H. L"c. and T, "tloping Countries. with India as a Cast Srud_\'. of Karnataka State Council for Sll-Alfthan. Th~ Busic Nt~ds Approach, 10 D~vtlop- PIJCEES R.:port No .ltll. (Ccnter for Energy ence and Technolo and is a ro-mtnl. (Intcrnallonal Labor OrganIzation. G.:n.:va. and Envlronmcnlal Stud,.:s. Prlncclon IJnl"ersIIY. .gy, p .1977). Princcton, ~J,. 19M5). fessor at the Indian Institute of SCI-

9, P. Slrcclcn. S, J, Burqi, M, U Haq. N. Hicks, and 33, ~I J. ~lwandosya and M, L. P. Luhanga. Entrg.v ence. His address: Department of In-F, StCW"rt, FirSI ThiJlgs FirSI: MttliJlg Basic Nttds Us.. Patltrns in Tan.:ania. (Alnbio. t~is. jssu.c), organic and Physical Chemistry, In-In DtvtlopiJlg Counlrit.'. (Oxford UnivcrsilY 3-1, R.:publlca F.:deratlva du Brasli Mlnlslcno das d. I t' t t f S .

B IPrcss. N"w York. 19t11) ~Ijnas .: Energia. BalaJI"o Entrgtlico .Valional. Ian ns I u.e 0 clence, anga ore,10, M. Q, Quihria. World D.."tlopm..nl. 10. 2t15-291 Br"silia, Br"zil. (19M3) 560012, India.

(19M2) 35. ~I. H Ross. E, D. Lar"'n. and R. H, William,. Robert H. Williams is a senior re-II. P F, Palm.:do tr al.. Entrgy N ds aJld R..sourc.." En..rgy Dtmand antl/Wal..rials Flo,,'s in Ih.. Econo- search scientist at the Center for

In D..vtlopiJlg Countries. (Bnx,kha..cn Nal"mal In" PL' CEES Rcp"rt No. 193, (C.:nt.:r for En.:r- , ..Lah.,ralt)rv R':p',rt No, BLN 5()784, March, 197:11 It.. and En"in,nm.:ntal Studi"s. Prin"clon Univ"r- Energy and Environmental StudIes In

12. Amilcar o. H.:rr"ra tl ai" ClllttStrtJph.. or N..,,' S;I~, Princ':lon. N"w J"rs.:y. July. 19K5) Princeton, New Jersey. His address:Soci..,_\': A LtJtin Am..ri.'an World ,~/I)d..l. .r':p'.rt 3/1 K. C: .~hukla .nd J. R, Hurl.:~. D..v..lopm"'~IIJf Center for Energy and EnvironmentaluI th.: Fundaclun BanltlCh". (Inl"rn.t",nal 0,,- tlndEJ/I",..""Lol,'NO.Oom..sucGasRanli...Cook ., n New Jerse'.:Iupm"nl R"",arch C.:nl"r. Ollaw., 1'17/1) Top. R':p"rl pr"par"d h~ Th"rmtlCl,,"lron <'urp')- Studies, Prlnceto. Y.

13 How.rd S G"II"r, Saln Baldwin, Gaulam S Dull. r.tion, Walth.m, ~I",sachus""', fur Ih" I G", R,,- 08544, U.S,A.and ~ II R""indran.lh, "Impn'",d C""k"lo\"" ",.r.:h In'lilul", Jul~, I'/X.'I.Sign,ufSu"c"":'(,4,"hi'J.lhi,i,,uc) .1" R II \Yilli.m" G S Dull. .nd II S (;"II"r,

2(XJ -\~18IU \Ol t~ NO ~-5