Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-5 (section)

==== 5.2.2.2 Variations in Energy Use ====

<div id="h3-3-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

There is ''high evidence'' and ''high agreement'' in the literature that through equitable distribution, well-being for all can be assured at the lowest-possible energy consumption levels ( [[#Steinberger--2010|Steinberger and Roberts 2010]] ; [[#Oswald--2020|Oswald et al. 2020]] ) by reducing emissions related to consumption as much as possible, while assuring DLS for everyone ( [[#Annecke--2002|Annecke 2002]] ; [[#de%20Zoysa--2011|de Zoysa 2011]] ; [[#Ehrlich--2013|Ehrlich and Ehrlich 2013]] ; [[#Spangenberg--2014|Spangenberg 2014]] ; [[#Toroitich--2014|Toroitich and Kerber 2014]] ; [[#Kenner--2015|Kenner 2015]] ; [[#Toth--2016|Toth and Szigeti 2016]] ; [[#Smil--2017|Smil 2017]] ; [[#Otto--2019|Otto et al. 2019]] ; [[#Baltruszewicz--2021|Baltruszewicz et al. 2021]] ). For example, at similar levels of human development, per capita energy demand in the US was 63% higher than in Germany ( [[#Arto--2016|Arto et al. 2016]] ); those patterns are explained by context in terms of various climate, cultural and historical factors influencing consumption. Context matters even in within-country analysis, for example, electricity consumption in the US shows that efficiency innovations do exert positive influence on savings of residential energy consumption, but the relationship is mixed; on the contrary, affluence (household income and home size) and context (geographical location) drive resource utilisation significantly ( [[#Adua--2019|Adua and Clark 2019]] ); affluence is central to any future prospect in terms of environmental conditions ( [[#Wiedmann--2020|Wiedmann et al. 2020]] ). In China, inequality of energy consumption and expenditure varies highly depending on the energy type, end-use demand and climatic region ( [[#Wu--2017|Wu et al. 2017]] ).

Consumption is energy- and materials-intensive and expands along with income. About half of the energy used in the world is consumed by the richest 10% of people, most of whom live in developed countries, especially when one includes the energy embodied in the goods they purchase from other countries and the structure of consumption as a function of income level ( [[#Arto--2016|Arto et al. 2016]] ; [[#Wolfram--2016|Wolfram et al. 2016]] ; [[#Santillán%20Vera--2021|Santillán Vera et al. 2021]] ). International trade plays a central role, being responsible for shifting burdens in most cases from low-income developing countries producers to high-income developed countries as consumers ( [[#Wiedmann--2020|Wiedmann et al. 2020]] ). China is the largest exporter to the EU and United States, and accounts for nearly half and 40% of their imports in energy use respectively ( [[#Wu--2019|Wu et al. 2019]] ). Wealthy countries have exported or outsourced their climate and energy crisis to low- and middle-income countries ( [[#Baker--2018|Baker 2018]] ), exacerbated by intensive international trade ( [[#Steinberger--2012|Steinberger et al. 2012]] ; [[#Scherer--2018|Scherer et al. 2018]] ). Therefore, issues of total energy consumption are inseparably related to the energy inequity among the countries and regions of the world.

Within the energy use induced by global consumer products, household consumption is the biggest contributor, contributing to around three-quarters of the global total ( [[#Wu--2019|Wu et al. 2019]] ). A more granular analysis of household energy consumption reveals that the lowest two quintiles in countries with average annual income below USD15,000 cap –1 yr –1 consume less energy than the international energy requirements for DLS (20–50 GJ cap –1 ); 77% of people consume less than 30 GJ cap –1 yr –1 and 38% consume less than 10 GJ cap –1 yr –1 ( [[#Oswald--2020|Oswald et al. 2020]] ). Many energy-intensive goods have high price elasticity (&gt;1.0), implying that growing incomes lead to over-proportional growth of energy footprints in these consumption categories. Highly unequally distributed energy consumption is concentrated in the transport sector, ranging from vehicle purchase to fuels, and most unequally in package holidays and aviation ( [[#Gössling--2019|Gössling 2019]] ; [[#Oswald--2020|Oswald et al. 2020]] ).

Socio-economic dynamics and outcomes affect whether provisioning of goods and services is achieved at low energy demand levels (Figure 5.4). Specifically, multivariate regression shows that public service quality, income equality, democracy, and electricity access enable higher need satisfaction at lower energy demand, whereas extractivism and economic growth beyond moderate levels of affluence reduce need satisfaction at higher energy demand ( [[#Vogel--2021|Vogel et al. 2021]] ). Altogether, this demonstrates that at a given level of energy provided, there is large scope to improve service levels for well-being by modifying socio-economic context without increasing energy supply (Figure 5.4).

<div id="_idContainer013" class="Basic-Text-Frame"></div>

[[File:2e52df68d01befeff2f6531a1b1ef945 IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Figure_5_4.png]]

'''Figure 5.4 | Improving services for well-being is possible, often at huge margin, at a given (relatively low) level of energy use.''' Source: reused with permission from [[#Vogel--2021|Vogel et al. (2021)]] .

<div id="5.2.2.3" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="variations-in-consumption-based-emissions"></span>