Search

The authors are all devoted energy system and sustainability transformation scholars, who collaborate regularly and actively at global and local levels to advance the knowledge space of demand-side solutions and policies. They are members of a growing bottom-up initiative, the Energy Demand Changes Induced by Technological and Social Innovations (EDITS) network (https://iiasa.ac.at/projects/edits), which builds on various research disciplines to facilitate advances in modeling, data compilation, and analysis of the scope and breadth of the potential contributions of demand-side solutions for climate change mitigation, improved wellbeing for all, and sustainability, complementing supply-side solutions for decarbonizing the energy and material systems.

Energy security is a top priority for governments, companies, and households because energy systems and the critical functions that they support are threatened by disruptions from wars, pandemics, climate change, and other shocks (1). More often than not, governments rely on policies focused on energy supply to enhance energy security while generally ignoring demand-side possibilities. Further, the indicators traditionally used to measure energy security are also tilted toward the supply side; this fails to capture the full spectrum of vulnerability to energy crises. Energy security assessments need to reflect the wider benefits of security-related interventions more accurately. To that end, we develop a systematic approach to measuring the energy security impacts of policy interventions that explicitly considers energy demand (buildings, transport, and industry). We determine that demand-side actions outperform conventional supply-side approaches at making countries more resilient.

Buildings are key in supporting human activities and well-being by providing shelter and other important services to their users. Buildings are, however, also responsible for major energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during their life cycle. Improving the quality of services provided by buildings while reaching low energy demand (LED) levels is crucial for climate and sustainability targets. Building sector models have become essential tools for decision support on strategies to reduce energy demand and GHG emissions. Yet current models have significant limitations in their ability to assess the transformations required for LED. We review building sector models ranging from the subnational to the global scale to identify best practices and critical gaps in representing transformations toward LED futures. We focus on three key dimensions of intervention (socio-behavioral, infrastructural, and technological), three megatrends (digitalization, sharing economy, and circular economy), and decent living standards. This review recommends the model developments needed to better assess LED transformations in buildings and support decision-making toward sustainability targets.

Developing transformative pathways for industry’s compliance with international climate targets requires model-based insights on how supply- and demand-side measures affect industry, material cycles, global supply chains, socio-economic activities and service provisioning supporting societal wellbeing. Herein, we review the recent literature modelling the industrial system for Low Energy and Materials Demand (LEMD) futures, resulting in lowered environmental pressures without relying on negative emissions. We identify 77 innovative studies drawing on nine distinct industry modelling traditions and critically assess system definitions and scopes, biophysical and thermodynamic consistency, granularity and heterogeneity, and operationalization of demand and service provision. We find large potentials of combined supply- and demand-side measures to reduce current economy-wide material use by -56%, energy use by -40 to -60%, and GHG emissions by -70% to net-zero. We call for strengthening interdisciplinary collaborations between industry modelling traditions and demand-side research, to produce more insightful scenarios and discuss research challenges and recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of radiological re-staging after two and four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the impact of re-staging on further patient management, and the correlation between clinical and final pathological tumour stage at radical cystectomy (RC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal, single-centre, cohort study of prospectively collected consecutive patients who underwent NAC and RC for urothelial muscle-invasive bladder cancer between July 2001 and December 2017. Patients underwent repeated computed tomography scans for re-staging after two cycles of NAC and after completion of NAC before RC. RESULTS: Of 180 patients, 110 had ≥four cycles of NAC and had complete imaging available. In the entire cohort, further patient management was only changed in 2/180 patients (1.1%) after two cycles of NAC based on radiological findings. Patients who were stable after two cycles but then downstaged after at least four cycles of NAC had a similarly lowered risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53). Only one patient downstaged after two cycles was subsequently upstaged after four cycles. Clinical downstaging was observed in 51 patients (46%), 55 patients (50%) had no change in clinical stage and four patients (3.6%) were clinically upstaged. Patients clinically downstaged after four cycles of NAC had a lower risk of death (HR 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.25-0.94; P = 0.033) compared to those with no change or upstaged after completion of NAC. CONCLUSIONS: Re-staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer after two cycles of NAC offers little additional information, rarely changes patient management, and may therefore be omitted, whereas re-staging after completion of NAC by CT is a strong predictor of overall survival.

The COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war on Ukraine have impacted the global economy, including the energy sector. The pandemic caused drastic fluctuations in energy demand, oil price shocks, disruptions in energy supply chains, and hampered energy investments, while the war left the world with energy price hikes and energy security challenges. The long-term impacts of these crises on low-carbon energy transitions and mitigation of climate change are still uncertain but are slowly emerging. This paper analyzes the impacts throughout the energy system, including upstream fuel supply, renewable energy investments, demand for energy services, and implications for energy equity, by reviewing recent studies and consulting experts in the field. We find that both crises initially appeared as opportunities for low-carbon energy transitions: the pandemic by showing the extent of lifestyle and behavioral change in a short period and the role of science-based policy advice, and the war by highlighting the need for greater energy diversification and reliance on local, renewable energy sources. However, the early evidence suggests that policymaking worldwide is focused on short-term, seemingly quicker solutions, such as supporting the incumbent energy industry in the post-pandemic era to save the economy and looking for new fossil fuel supply routes for enhancing energy security following the war. As such, the fossil fuel industry may emerge even stronger after these energy crises creating new lock-ins. This implies that the public sentiment against dependency on fossil fuels may end as a lost opportunity to translate into actions toward climate-friendly energy transitions, without ambitious plans for phasing out such fuels altogether. We propose policy recommendations to overcome these challenges toward achieving resilient and sustainable energy systems, mostly driven by energy services.

The OneEarth Climate Model (OECM), its background, and program architecture are described. How the OECM is broken down into two independent modules to calculate demand and supply is explored. The basic program logic of the MATLAB-based bottom-up demand module, with high technical resolution, is described for various sectors, including the input and output parameters. The description includes numerous figures and tables for both demand and supply modules. The sub-sectors used for the OECM 1.5 °C pathway are listed, including outputs and the areas of use. The second part of the chapter documents the high-efficiency building (HEB) model of the Central European University, which was used for the global and regional bottom-up analyses of the building sector. Its methodology, including the programme architecture, the workflow, and the equations used, is provided

AbstractThis section documents the development of four different energy demand pathways on the basis of the high-efficiency buildings (HEB) model of the Central European University. The assumptions and the scenario narratives are derived and the results provided in numerous graphs and tables. Of the four derived scenarios, two are selected for the OECM and the selection criteria are justified. The results in terms of the global energy demand and energy-related CO2 emissions are provided in tables.