TRACKING SDG7: THE ENERGY PROGRESS REPORT 2018 A joint report of the custodian agencies United Nations Statistics Division © 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Report designed by: Lauren Kaley Johnson, The World Bank Group Cover photo: Supriya Biswas, Irena TRACKING SDG7: THE ENERGY PROGRESS REPORT 2018 A joint report of the custodian agencies United Nations Statistics Division Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 PARTNERS The development of the Energy Progress Report was made possible by the by exceptional collaboration between the five SDG7 custodian agencies, specially constituted in a Steering Group: • International Energy Agency (IEA) • World Bank (WB) • International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) • World Health Organization (WHO) • United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) The Steering Group was supported by an Advisory Group composed as follows. • Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) • United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) • Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (“the Alliance”) • United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) • Global Water Partnership (GWP) • United Nations Economic Commission for • International Institute for Applied Systems Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) Analysis (IIASA) • United Nations Economic and Social • International Network on Gender and Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) Sustainable Energy (ENERGIA) • United Nations Economic and Social • International Partnership for Energy Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) Efficiency Cooperation (IPEEC) • United Nations Environment Programme • Practical Action (UNEP) • Renewable Energy Policy Network for the • Copenhagen Centre on Energy Efficiency 21st Century (REN21) • UN Energy • Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) • United Nations Foundation (UNF) • Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) • United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) • United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UNDESA) • World Energy Council (WEC) • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) The Steering Group’s collaboration was made possible by agreement among the senior management of the member agencies. Fatih Birol (IEA), Adnan Z. Amin (IRENA), Stefan Schweinfest (UNSD), Riccardo Puliti (World Bank), and Soumya Swaminathan (WHO) with Rohit Khanna (ESMAP) oversaw the development of the Energy Progress Report in collaboration with Minoru Takada (UNDESA). The technical co-leadership of the project by the Custodian Agencies was the responsibility of Laura Cozzi and Hannah Daly (IEA), Rabia Ferroukhi (IRENA), Ralf Becker (UN Statistics), Vivien Foster (World Bank), and Heather Adair-Rohani (World Health Organization). Financial support from ESMAP, to fund tasks managed by the World Bank, is gratefully acknowledged. ii  CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION 12 CHAPTER 2 – ELECTRIFICATION 16 CHAPTER 3 – ACCESS TO CLEAN FUELS AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR COOKING 40 CHAPTER 4 – RENEWABLE ENERGY 56 CHAPTER 5 –ENERGY EFFICIENCY 80 CHAPTER 6 – GLOBAL PROSPECTS FOR SDG 7 98 DATA ANNEX 110 ANNEX 2 • SHEDDING LIGHT ON ELECTRIFICATION DATA 128 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 168 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 170 iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Photo: SuvraKanti Das/IRENA Executive Summary OVERALL MESSAGES The world is not currently on track to meet Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7), which calls for ensuring “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” by 2030. Current progress falls short on all four of the SDG7 targets, which encompass universal access to electricity as well as clean fuels and technologies for cooking, and call for a doubling of the rate of improvement of energy efficiency, plus a substantial increase in the share of renewables in the global energy mix. While overall progress falls short on meeting all targets, real gains are being made in certain areas. Expansion of access to electricity in poorer countries has recently begun to accelerate, with progress overtaking population growth for the first time in sub-Saharan Africa. Energy efficiency continues to improve, driven by advances in the industrial sector. Renewable energy is making impressive gains in the electricity sector, although these are not being matched in transportation and heating – which together account for 80 percent of global energy consumption. Lagging furthest behind is access to clean cooking fuels and technologies – an area that has been typically overlooked by policymakers. Use of traditional cooking fuels and technologies among a large proportion of the world’s population has serious and widespread negative health, environmental, climate and social impacts. More encouraging than global trends, however, are the strong performances evident within specific countries, across both the developed and developing worlds. These national experiences provide valuable lessons for other countries, and evidence is mounting that with holistic approaches, targeted policies and international support, substantial gains can be made in clean energy and energy access that will improve the lives of millions of people. BOX E1 • WHAT IS THE ENERGY PROGRESS REPORT ? The Energy Progress Report provides a global dashboard on progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7). The report is a joint effort of the International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), the World Bank, and the World Health Organization (WHO), which the United Nations (UN) has named as global custodian agencies, responsible for collecting and reporting on country-by-country energy indicators for reporting on SDG7. This report tracks global, regional and country progress on the four targets of SDG7: energy access (electricity, clean fuels and technologies for cooking), renewable energy and energy efficiency, based on statistical indicators endorsed by the UN. The report updates progress with the latest available data up to 2016 for energy access, and 2015 for clean energy, against a baseline year of 2010. A longer historical period back to 1990 is also provided by way of reference. The Energy Progress Report is a successor to the earlier Global Tracking Framework (published in 2013, 2015 and 2017), which was co-led by the IEA and World Bank under the auspices of the UN’s Sustainable Energy for All (SE4All) initiative, and builds on the same methodological foundation. 1 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ELECTRIFICATION: HOPEFUL SIGNS OF ACCELERATION IN LAGGING REGIONS Roughly 1 billion people – or about 13% of the world’s FIGURE E1 • Percentage of population with access population – live without electricity. The number of people to electricity (%) gaining access to power has been accelerating since 2010 0% 100% to around 118 million each year, but progress has been uneven, and needs to become more widespread and ramp up further if the SDG7 goal of universal access to electricity is to be met by 2030. Otherwise, if current policies and Status as of baseline year in 2010 83 % 87% population trends continue, as many as 674 million people Progress between 2010 and 2016 92% Projected progress up to 2030 under current trajectory will continue to live without electricity in 2030.1 Remaining gap towards achievement of 2030 SDG7 target 100% Source: World Bank The regions of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia continue to have the largest access-deficit. The number of people without access in sub-Saharan Africa has recently begun to fall in absolute terms for the first time, driven by strong performers in East Africa. Electrification also outpaced population growth in South Asia. About 80 percent of those without electricity live in top 20 largest access deficit countries whose progress has a major influence on global outcomes. While this group made progress overall, access gains were uneven. Some of the strongest gains were Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania, which expanded access by at least 3 percent of their population annually between 2010 and 2016. Over the same period, India continued to make major efforts, providing electricity to 30 million people each year, more than any other country. The urban-rural chasm in access remains wide, with almost 87% of the world’s population without electricity living in rural areas. However, off-grid solar solutions ranging from solar home systems to solar mini-grids are emerging as an important driver of rural energy access, complementing grid electrification in some countries. Emerging evidence suggests that tens of millions of people now have access to electricity through solar home systems. However, these remain concentrated in about a handful of pioneering countries where off-grid solar electricity already reaches as much as 5-15% of the population; even more in some cases. Identifying the barriers to implementation of low-cost, off-grid solar solutions is a crucial priority for policymakers. SDG7 calls for access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Affordability is an added challenge for countries that are still working to reach universal access to electricity, with the burden of households spending on electricity on average twice as high in these countries. The experience of countries that have already reached universal access, suggests that this takes strong leadership commitment, backed up by sustained public financing for grid extension. The private sector can increasingly play a role in catalyzing uptake of off-grid solar solutions, underscoring the importance of a suitable enabling environment for new technologies, as well as strategic planning that clearly delineates the role for grid and off-grid approaches.2 1 IEA 2017 Energy Access Outlook: from Poverty to Prosper, A World Energy Outlook-2017 special report. OECD/IEA, Paris. 2 Draws upon Policy Brief No. 1 on Electrification from “Accelerating SDG7 Achievement: Policy Briefs in Support of the First SDG7 Review at the UN High Level Political Forum 2018, UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York, April 2018. 2 Executive Summary Some 40 countries achieved universal access to electricity since 2010 FIGURE E2 • Annual increase in electricity access rate in 2010-2016 (pp) in access deficit countries Achieved universal access between 2010-2016 Annual access growth rate falling Annual access growth rate above 2 percentage points Top 20 Access Deficit Countries Annual access growth rate between 0 and 2 percentage points Source: World Bank Bangladesh, together with Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania, are moving faster on electrification than other countries with large unserved populations FIGURE E3 • The 20 countries with the largest access-deficit over the 2010-2016 period World Average, 0.64 pp 100 90 World Average, 87.35% Access rate 2016 (% of total population) 80 India Bangladesh 70 60 Nigeria Myanmar Kenya 50 Angola Korea, Dem. Ethiopia 40 Sudan People's Rep. Zambia Mali Tanzania 30 Madagascar Upper-middle Income Uganda Lower-middle Income 20 Niger Mozambique Low Income 10Malawi Burkina Faso Bubble size is proportional to access deficit. Congo, Dem. Rep. Chad 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 Annualized average change, 2010-2016 (percentage points) Source: World Bank 3 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 CLEAN COOKING: SUCCESS STORIES ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN Three billion people – or more than 40 percent of the FIGURE E4 • Percentage of population with access to world’s population – do not have access to clean fuels clean cooking (%) and technologies for cooking. Household air pollution 0% 100% from the use of inefficient stoves paired with biomass, coal and kerosene for cooking is responsible for some 4 million deaths a year, with women and children at most risk. Progress in access to clean cooking fuels 58% and technologies has barely kept pace with population Status as of baseline year in 2010 59% growth. Progress between 2010 and 2016 73% Projected progress up to 2030 under current trajectory 100% Remaining gap towards achievement of 2030 SDG7 target To meet the goal of universal access by 2030, access Source: World Health Organization, UN Population data expansion will need to accelerate dramatically from 0.5 percentage points of population currently each year to an average of 3 percentage points each year between 2017-2030. If the current trajectory continues, 2.3 billion people will continue to use traditional cooking solutions in 2030, perpetuating much of the current negative health, environmental, climate and development impacts.3 While parts of Asia have seen access to clean cooking outpace growth in population, in Sub-Saharan Africa, gains have only been marginal, with the region’s overall population growing four times faster than the population that gained access to clean cooking technologies between 2014-2016. Of the 20 countries with the largest deficit in access to clean cooking, only nine were able to expand access faster than population growth between 2014 and 2016. These positive outcomes were driven largely by widespread dissemination of LPG or piped natural gas cooking solutions in India, Pakistan, Indonesia and Vietnam. The need for rapid deployment of clean cooking fuels and technologies has not received the attention it deserves from policy-makers, and lags well behind the rate of electrification in almost every country, even in spite of the smaller costs needed to ensure clean cooking solutions for all compared to electrification. High entry costs for many clean cooking solutions, a lack of consumer awareness of their benefits, financing gaps for producers seeking to enter the market, slow progress in the innovation of clean cookstoves, and lack of infrastructure for fuel production and distribution have together kept widespread solutions to this challenge out of reach.4 3 IEA, 2017. Energy Access Outlook: from Poverty to Prosperity, A World Energy Outlook-2017 special report. OECD/IEA, Paris. 4 Draws upon Policy Brief No. 2 on Clean Cooking from “Accelerating SDG7 Achievement: Policy Briefs in Support of the First SDG7 Review at the UN High Level Political Forum 2018, UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York, April 2018. 4 Executive Summary In contrast to electrification, access to clean cooking is actually falling in some countries FIGURE E5 • Annual increase in clean cooking access rate in 2010-2016 (pp) in access deficit countries Annual access growth rate above 2 percentage points Annual access growth rate between 0 and 2 percentage points Annual access growth rate falling Top 20 Access Deficit Countries Source: World Health Organization, UN Population data Among the top 20 countries with largest unserved populations, Indonesia and Vietnam stand as having made the most rapid progress FIGURE E6 • The 20 countries with the largest clean cooking access deficit over the 2010-2016 period 80 World Average 0.52 70 Vietnam Access rate 2016 (% of total population) World Average 59.1 60 China Indonesia India 50 Pakistan Sudan 40 Philippines Afghanistan 30 Bangladesh Ghana 20 Low Income Congo, Myanmar Lower-middle Income Dem. Rep. Kenya Upper-middle Income 10 Mozambique Korea, Dem. People's Rep. Bubble size is proportional to access deficit. Nigeria 0 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Uganda Ethiopia Madagascar Tanzania Annualized average change in population with access 2010-16 (percentage points) Source: World Health Organization, UN Population data 5 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 RENEWABLE ENERGY: PROGRESS ON ELECTRICITY NOT YET MATCHED BY HEATING AND TRANSPORT As of 2015, the world obtained 17.5% of its total final energy FIGURE E7 • Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) consumption from renewable sources, of which 9.6% came 0% from modern forms of renewable energy such as bioenergy, geothermal, hydropower, solar and wind. The remaining renewable energy is derived from traditional uses of biomass (such as fuelwood and charcoal), of which a significant proportion is used by around 3 billion people in polluting 16.7% Status as of baseline year in 2010 17.5% cookstoves. Based on current policies, the renewable share is Progress between 2010 and 2015 21% expected to reach just 21% by 2030, with modern renewables Projected progress up to 2030 under current trajectory Source: World Bank growing to 15% of total final energy consumption, falling short of the substantial increase demanded by the SDG 7 target.5 The continued rapid growth of total final energy consumption in the developing world, has made it particularly challenging to increase the renewable energy share; even when substantial investment in renewable energy is taking place. Rapidly falling costs and enabling policy frameworks have allowed solar and wind to compete with conventional power generation sources in multiple geographies, enabling the share of renewables in electricity to rise relatively rapidly reaching 22.8% in 2015. Nevertheless, electricity accounted for only 20% of total final energy consumption that year, highlighting the need to accelerate progress in use of renewables for transport and heating/cooling, sectors of vital importance to reaching the global target. The share of renewable energy in transport is rising quite rapidly, but from a very low base, amounting to only 2.8% in 2015, while the use of renewable energy for heating purposes has barely increased in recent years and stood at 24.8% in 2015, of which only one third was from modern renewables. Looking at the overall global picture, several countries stand out for salient performances, with China alone accounting for nearly 30% of absolute growth in renewable energy consumption globally in 2015. Brazil was the only country among the top 20 largest energy consumers to substantially exceed the global average renewable share in all end uses: electricity, transport and heating. The UK’s share of renewable energy in total final energy consumption grew by 1 percentage point annually on average since 2010 – more than five times the global average over the same period. Looking ahead, much greater efforts will be required in end-uses, such as heating/cooling and transport, where renewable penetration remains low yet unexploited potential exists. One avenue would be greater adoption of district energy systems (for heating or cooling) based on biomass, geothermal or solar thermal energy. As the electricity sector decarbonizes, other energy uses can increasingly switch into electricity, such as electric vehicles for instance. A phase out of fossil fuel subsidies would help to encourage such shifts. Sustaining the growth of renewable electricity will further require additional attention to grid integration issues, including the incorporation of battery storage and smart grid technology to support management of variable generation resources. Finally, the more rapid global progress on energy efficiency, the larger will be the impact of renewable energy investments on the overall global energy mix.6 5 IEA, 2017. World Energy Outlook-2017. OECD/IEA, Paris. 6 Draws upon Policy Brief No. 3 on Renewable Energy from “Accelerating SDG7 Achievement: Policy Briefs in Support of the First SDG7 Review at the UN High Level Political Forum 2018, UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York, April 2018. 6 Executive Summary A significant number of countries have seen their renewable energy share decline FIGURE E8 • Annual increase in renewable energy share of total final energy consumption (TFEC) in 2010- 2015 (pp) Avg. annual increase >1% Avg. annual increase >0% and <=1% Avg. annual decrease <=0% and >=-1% Avg. annual decrease <-1% Top 20 Energy Consumption Countries Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) and United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) data Among larger energy consumers, developed countries tend to have lower renewable energy shares than developing countries, but their shares are increasing more rapidly FIGURE E9 • Top 20 energy consumption countries plotting renewable energy share in TFEC (2015) against annual average percentage change in renewable energy share in TFEC (2010-2015), with bubbles scaled according to TFEC size 100% High income annual average Nigeria High Income Renewable Energy Share in TFEC 2015 (%) 80% Upper-middle Income Lower-middle Income Low Income 60% Brazil 40% India Indonesia High income average Renewabe Canada Energy share in Total Final 20% Energy Consumption Turkey China Spain Italy Germany France Mexico Australia United States of America Japan United Kingdom Russian Federation Korea (Rep. of) Iran 0% Saudi Arabia -0.80% -0.40% 0.00% 0.40% 0.80% 1.20% -20% Annual average percentage change of renewable share in TFEC 2010-15 Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) and United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) data 7 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ENERGY EFFICIENCY: ECONOMIC GROWTH OUTSTRIPS ENERGY DEMAND Globally, energy intensity – the ratio of energy used per FIGURE E10 • Compared annual growth rate of unit of GDP – continued to fall at an accelerated pace of improvement in energy intensity (percentage points per year) 2.8 percent in 2015, the fastest decline since 2010. This 0% 2.6% improved the average annual decline in energy intensity to 2.2 percent for the period 2010-2015. However, progress still falls short of the 2.6 percent yearly decline needed to meet the SDG7 target of doubling the global rate of improvement 1.3% Status as of baseline year in 2010 in energy efficiency by 2030.7 Without intensifying efforts, 2.2% Progress between 2010 and 2015 2.4% Projected progress up to 2030 under current trajectory the pace of improvement is not expected to exceed 2.4 2.6% Remaining gap towards achievement of 2030 SDG7 target percent during 2016-2030.8 Source: World Bank There is mounting evidence of the uncoupling of growth and energy use. Global gross domestic product (GDP) grew nearly twice as fast as primary energy supply in 2010-15. In fact, economic growth outpaced growth in energy use in all regions, except for Western Asia, and in all income groups. Improvement in industrial energy intensity, which is the largest energy consuming sector, was particularly encouraging, at 2.7 percent per annum since 2010. However, progress was more modest elsewhere. In high income countries, transportation is the largest energy consuming sector, where there is a need to accelerate efficiency gains, especially for road freight services. In low and middle-income countries, residential energy consumption is high and intensity has been increasing since 2010. Improving efficiency of electricity supply also poses a challenge with thermal power generation presenting unmet potential for efficiency gains, as average fuel conversion efficiency lingered below 39 percent worldwide. In addition, transmission and distribution losses remained high at close to 16 percent in low-income and lower-middle income countries. The performance of the world’s top twenty countries in terms of primary energy supply is critical to achieving the SDG7 target. In 2015, these countries accounted for nearly 80 percent of total primary energy supply. Encouragingly, six of them, including two of the world’s top five (Japan and the US), seem to have reached a peak in energy use, reducing their annual primary energy supply in 2010-15 while continuing to grow GDP. Among the large energy- intensive developing economies, China and Indonesia stood out with annual improvement exceeding 3 percent; even as others, notably Brazil and Iran, saw their energy intensity increase. While progress is encouraging, a host of proven energy efficiency policies remain to be systematically adopted in many countries. Building codes for residential and commercial facilities should include energy performance standards for new construction and major renovation. Increasingly, it would be desirable to adopt ambitious cross-sectoral integrated policy approaches that promote stretch improvements through targets or fiscal incentives, as have been applied with some success in China and Europe.9 7 Improvements in global energy efficiency slowed down dramatically in 2016 and 2017, with the rate of improvement in 2017 at 1.7% (IEA, 2018 Global Energy & CO2 Status Report, IEA/OECD, 2018; www.iea.org/geco. 8 IEA, 2017b. World Energy Outlook-2017. OECD/IEA, Paris. 9 Draws upon Policy Brief No. 4 on Energy Efficiency from “Accelerating SDG7 Achievement: Policy Briefs in Support of the First SDG7 Review at the UN High Level Political Forum 2018, UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York, April 2018. 8 Executive Summary Many countries are showing relatively rapid improvement in energy intensity, but others are moving in the opposite direction FIGURE E11 • Annualized change in energy intensity in 2010-2015 (pp) Annual primary energy intensity growth rate above 0% Annual primary energy intensity growth rate between 0% and -2% Annual primary energy intensity Changes in primary energy intensity are influenced by multiple factors, including growth rate under -2% technology, policies and economy, as well as exogenous variables such as weather. Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), and World Development Indicators (WDI) data Strong improvements in energy intensity are evident both among large emerging economies, like China and Indonesia, as well as among developed economies like Japan and the United Kingdom FIGURE E12 • Top 20 countries’ compound annual growth rate of energy intensity, 2010-2015, and energy intensity, 2015 9 South Africa 8 Primary Energy Intensity (MJ/2011 US$PPP, 2015) Iran Canada 7 China Republic of Korea 6 Saudia Arabia United States of America Nigeria Thailand World Average (5.3 MJ/2011 US$PPP) 5 Russian Federation India 4 France Brazil (-2.2%) Japan Mexico Indonesia Germany 3 United Kingdom Turkey Italy Global Average: High income 2 - Upper middle income Lower middle income 1 Low income 0 -5% -4% -3% -2% -1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% Compound Annual Growth Rate (%, 2010-15) Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 9 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 CONCLUSIONS Looking at each of the dimensions of sustainable energy more closely helps us understand why the world still falls short of its goal and what kinds of targeted efforts are needed – across different countries and sectors – to accelerate global progress towards the goal in the coming years. Further improvements on the steady levels of progress so far will require greater policy commitment and increased funding, as well as a willingness to embrace new technologies on a much wider scale. This report helps identify where good policies have been adopted and points to approaches that may deserve greater attention from policy-makers going forward. BOX E2 • HOW CAN DATA FOR SDG7 TRACKING BE FURTHER IMPROVED? Many challenges remain in providing a comprehensive picture of the global energy situation, and sustained efforts are needed to improve data quality and availability. One key area of focus is to improve the coverage and precision of household survey questionnaires to more accurately reflect the nature and quality of service for electricity and clean cooking. Current indicators do not make it possible to capture the affordability and reliability dimensions emphasized by SDG7. While the off- grid solar revolution is making it increasingly challenging to accurately reflect trends in rural electrification. Equally important is to strengthen statistical capacity to produce accurate energy balances, particularly in the developing countries, where many challenges remain in capturing, for instance, the traditional uses of biomass. Furthermore, there is still relatively little information on the energy efficiency of major consuming sectors outside of the major economies that is critical to inform policy interventions. 10 Executive Summary 11 CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION Photo: Mobisol Group INTRODUCTION In September 2015, the global community adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030. For the first time, energy is occupying a central place in the world’s development agenda with the adoption of SDG 7, which aims to “ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all.” SDG7 comprises four related targets. Goal 7.1 relating to energy access comprises both 7.1.1 calling for universal electrification and 7.1.2 calling for universal access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking. Goal 7.2 looks for a substantial increase in the share of energy consumption from renewable sources, Goal 7.3 lays down a doubling of the rate of improvement of energy efficiency globally. SDG 7 builds on the earlier foundation of former United Nations Secretary General’s Sustainable Energy for All Initiative, which first adopted targets for energy access and clean energy, which were later adapted to SDGs. Building on this foundation, the UN General Assembly pronounced 2012 the Year of Sustainable Energy for All and later, 2014–24 the Decade of Sustainable Energy for All. With SDG7 one of a handful of SDGs to be reviewed by the UN’s High Level Political Forum in July 2018, and with the midpoint of the UN Decade fast approaching in September 2019, SDG7 is currently the subject of considerable political focus. This report builds on a series of three earlier reports (published in 2013, 2015 and 2017) under the title “Sustainable Energy for All Global Tracking Framework”. These reports, co-led by IEA and the World Bank in partnership with a broad consortium of partner agencies1, built consensus around indicators that could be used to measure progress towards global energy goals, and constructed a database of indicators for all countries in the world going back as far as 1990. These indicators are drawn from official national statistics, primary national energy balances produced by ministries of energy, and household surveys published by national statistical agencies. The data are compiled for almost all countries in the world and, where necessary, adjusted to follow consistent definitions that allow for meaningful comparisons across countries and over time. The indicators developed by the Energy Progress Report were positively evaluated by the Bureau of the UN Statistical Commission in early 2015, and rated as Tier 1, meaning that they performed well on three main characteristics: feasibility, suitability, and relevance. As a result, they were subsequently adopted as the indicators for tracking progress toward SDG7 (Table 1.1). The UN Statistical Commission recognized as Custodian Agencies those international bodies that provide the primary data source for each of the relevant indicators. According to the process established by the UN, the latest values of indicators, together with associated story lines, are reported annually by the respective Custodian Agencies to the UN Statistics Division. This division compiles the information into an integrated annual UN Secretary General’s SDG Progress Report, which is presented for discussion at the High-level Political Forum held in July each year in New York. 1 The five organizations that form the consortium of authors for this report are the International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the United Nations Statistical Division, the World Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), and the World Health Organization (WHO). The full list Steering Group member organizations who contributed to this report can be referenced in the contents section. 13 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 TABLE 1 • Summary Overview of SDG7 Targets, Indicators and Custodians SDG7 Targets Indicator Custodian Agency Proportion of population with access World Bank (WB) 7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to electricity to affordable, reliable and modern Proportion of population with energy services primary reliance on clean fuels and World Health Organization (WHO) technologies International Energy Agency (IEA), 7.2 By 2030, increase substantially Renewable energy share in total final International Renewable Energy the share of renewable energy in the energy consumption Agency (IRENA), UN Statistics Division global energy mix (UNSD) 7.3 By 2030, double the global rate of Energy intensity measured in terms of International Energy Agency (IEA), UN improvement in energy efficiency primary energy and GDP Statistics Division (UNSD) As part of the SDG 7 Review process, the former Global Tracking Framework is being rebranded in 2018 as the SDG 7 Tracking Report. This renaming reflects the fact that the report is now fully aligned with the SDG 7 reporting structure and cycle, with future annual editions planned. In parallel, the governance framework of the report has been updated to reflect more prominently the role of the five Custodian Agencies—IEA, IRENA, UNSD, WB and WHO—while still retaining a broader advisory partnership. In that sense, it can be considered “a joint report of the Custodian Agencies,” with Custodian Agencies acting as lead (co-) authors for their respective indicators. The remainder of the report is organized in a series of chapters that report on progress on each of the four SDG7 targets. All chapters are relatively brief and each follows a common structure, beginning by highlighting the main messages, then providing a pictorial summary of the emerging trends through a series of self-narrating charts, and concluding with a short text reflecting on policy implications of the findings. The final chapter takes stock of recent modeling work to shed light on the feasibility of achieving SDG7 targets by 2030. 14 Chapter 1 – Introduction 15 CHAPTER 2 – ELECTRIFICATION Photo: Mobisol Group MAIN MESSAGES • Global trend: The share of global population with access to electricity edged up from 85.69%1 in 2014 to 87.35% in 2016. The access-deficit breached the symbolic threshold of 1 billion people unelectrified in 2016. An additional 135.7 million people were electrified each year during 2014-2016. However, after accounting for population growth, the annual net increase in population with access was only 49.3 million during the period. • 2030 target: The outlook for access to electricity shows that global efforts between 2016 and 2030 need to step up to 0.8 percentage points a year to reach universal access by 2030. If access-deficit countries do not accelerate their progress, there would still be 674 million people living without access to electricity in 2030 (IEA 2017). • Regional highlights2: Over the period 2014–16, the two regions with largest access deficits continued to increase their access rates—reaching 86.7% in Central Asia and Southern Asia and 43% in Sub- Saharan Africa in 2016. The absolute access-deficit in Sub-Saharan Africa peaked in 2015 at 595.3 million people and began to fall for the first time by 28.5 million people in 2016. • Urban-rural distribution: Although 97% of the urban population worldwide has access to electricity, the access rate in rural areas was much lower at 76% in 2016. In 2016, rural areas therefore encompassed 86.6% of the global access-deficit. However, because of slower population growth, rural access rates have been increasing more rapidly than urban ones, albeit from a lower base. Off-grid solar solutions are emerging as an important driver of rural energy access, complementing grid electrification at least in some countries. • Off-grid solar: Emerging evidence suggests off-grid solar electricity reaches about 141 million people in the developing world, of whom only 30 million enjoy a level of service considered to be “access” (IRENA 2018). Uptake is highly concentrated in about a dozen pioneering countries and can be as high as 5–10% for full solar home systems and greater than 10% for solar lanterns. • Affordability: Affordability is potentially an issue not only for countries working toward universal access but also for countries that have already achieved it. Estimates suggest that, even in countries with universal access, affordability concerns affect about 30% of the population; in countries working toward universal access, affordability affects 57% of those who already have access. • Top 20 access-deficit countries: Given that the top 20 access-deficit countries accounted for 79% of the global access deficit in 2016, progress among them is critical to meet the 2030 goal. Although this group made progress overall, access gains across the largest access-deficit countries were uneven over 1 Global Tracking Framework 2017 reported 85.3% of electrification rate in year 2014. The electrification rate is modified mainly due to the new survey data collected for year 2014. 2 The regions are divided according to UN SDG regions. 17 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 2014–16. Among the strongest performers were Bangladesh, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Tanzania, which expanded access by more than 5 percentage points annually between 2014 and 2016. • Socioeconomic electrification patterns: Access to electricity is strongly associated with poverty, with access rates four times higher in the top quintile of household expenditure compared to the bottom quintile across the 20 countries with the largest access deficit. Differences in electricity access by gender of head of household were also found to be material in a minority of the top 20 access-deficit countries. • Methodologies to estimate electrification: Within countries different methodologies can be used to estimate electrification, sometimes on the basis of direct demand-side reports from household surveys, and in other cases using supply-side data including utility connections and, increasingly, off-grid solar sales data. In most cases, demand-side measures of access lead to higher estimates of electrification than supply-side figures because they capture various informal types of electricity access that can be quite prevalent in the developing world—including sharing of utility connections, and various forms of self-provision such as household generators. FIGURE 2.1 • Share of population with access to electricity in 2016 (%) 100% From 50% up to 100% From 10% up to 50% Under 10% Top 20 Largest Access Deficit Countries Source: World Bank 18 Chapter 2 – Electrification THE STORY IN PICTURES GLOBAL TRENDS The global electrification rate continued to grow steadily reaching 87.35 percent in 2016 FIGURE 2.2 • Progress in electricity access from 1990 to 2016 (billions of people and share of population with access to electricity) 9.0 100% Share of population with access to electricity 8.0 83.5% 85.69% 87.35% 90% 77.7% 7.0 71.4% 80% 0.94 1.14 1.04 70% 6.0 Population (billion) 1.35 60% 5.0 1.49 50% 4.0 40% 6.21 6.48 3.0 5.77 30% 4.72 2.0 3.71 20% 1.0 10% 0.0 0% 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 Without access to electricity With access to electricity Share of population with access to electricity Source: World Bank Despite faster progress in electrification in 2014-2016 period, annual gains in the electrified population continue to slightly fall short of the pace required to meet the 2030 target FIGURE 2.3 • Average annual increase in access rate to electricity (percentage points) 1.00 Addtional progress required 0.90 0.90 due to lag since 2010: +0.08 0.80 Annualized growth rate (%) 0.75 0.70 0.61 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.83 0.82 0.33 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 1990-2010 2010-2012 2012-2014 2014-2016 2016-2030 Base period Target rate Source: World Bank 19 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ACCESS AND POPULATION The population with access to electricity is growing at a steady pace, and significantly faster than the population as a whole FIGURE 2.4 • Electricity access and population growth from 1990 to 2016, (index, 1990 = 100) 180 170 Population with access 160 Total population 150 Share of population with access to electricity 140 130 120 110 100 90 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 Source: World Bank In all regions of the world, electricity access grew at least as fast as population growth in 2014-2016 FIGURE 2.5 • Annual incremental access and population growth, 2014-2016, by region 136 57 140 60 120 50 Population (million) Population (million) 100 37 86 40 80 30 24 26 60 20 18 40 15 9 10 9 20 10 7 5 5 1 1 0 0 ld As nd As d an d ro ica ia ric n ric d Af ara n an be an Af an n or rn a a a Eu er ea ia ia pe a W er ia rib a rn sia h d m Oc Ca eric he si Sa st As an rn A ut l A he A b- ea n rt rn th Am So tra Su h- er he No ste ut st n tin rt Ce e So Ea e No W La Annualized Incremental population with access, 2014-2016 Annualized Incremental population, 2014-2016 Source: World Bank 20 Chapter 2 – Electrification THE ACCESS DEFICIT The number of people living without electricity worldwide dipped below 1 billion for the first time in 2016; notably, Sub-Saharan Africa’s access deficit finally started to fall in 2016. FIGURE 2.6 • Evolution of the access-deficit (millions of people), 1990-2016 1,600 1,400 1,200 World Populatoin (million) Sub-Saharan Africa 1,000 Central Asia and Southern Asia 800 600 400 200 0 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 Source: World Bank Nevertheless, Sub-Saharan Africa’s share in the global access deficit has more than doubled between 1990 and 2016 FIGURE 2.7 • Share of the regions in the global access-deficit (based on population without access to electricity), 1990 and 2016 Total Urban Rural 8% 12% 8% 31% 26% 1990 28% 46% 47% 40% 18% 17% 19% 6% 6% 9% 6% 27% 30% 11% 2016 7% 6% 60% 74% 58% Eastern Asia and South-Eastern Asia Sub-Saharan Africa Rest of the world Central Asia and Southern Asia Source: World Bank 21 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 URBAN-RURAL DIVIDE While the pace of access expansion grew rapidly in rural areas, it has remained almost constant in urban areas FIGURE 2.8 • Share of population with electricity access in urban and rural areas from 1990 to 2016, (index, 1990 = 100) 140 Urban 135 Rural 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 Source: World Bank In Central Asia and Southern Asia, there was substantial progress in rural electrification in 2014-2016 FIGURE 2.9 • Annual incremental access and population in the world, Sub-Saharan African and Central Asia and Southern Asia3, urban-rural, 2014-2016 World Sub-Saharan Africa Central Asia and Southern Asia 100 35 40 88 37 90 35 80 30 80 Population (million) Population (million) 30 Population (million) 70 25 60 19 25 20 17 20 50 48 20 15 16 40 15 11 15 30 10 10 8 20 6 5 5 10 0 0 0 Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Annualized Incremental population with access, 2014-2016 Annualized Incremental population, 2014-2016 Source: World Bank 3 3 The region of Central Asia & Southern Asia has a higher rural incremental population with access than the world because regions including Northern America & Europe, and Eastern Asia & South-eastern Asia, which have mostly achieved universal electrification, have decreasing rural population, and thus have a decreasing rural population with access to offset the progress made in other regions. 22 Chapter 2 – Electrification COUNTRY TRENDS The top 20 access-deficit countries accounted for 79% of the global access-deficit, with India alone accounting for 21.8% in 2016 FIGURE 2.10 • Share of population without access and total population, 2016 Chad – 91% Malawi – 89% Niger – 84% Congo, Democratic Republic of – 83% Share of population without access to electricity (%) Bukina Faso – 81% Madagascar – 77% 100% Mozambique – 76% Uganda – 73% 90% Zambia – 73% Tanzania – 67% 80% Mali – 65% Kenya – 44% Sudan – 61% 70% Korea, Dem. People’s Rep. – 61% Angola – 59% 60% Ethiopia – 57% Myanmar – 43% 50% Nigeria – 41% Bangladesh – 24% 40% India – 15% Rest of the world – 4% High Income 30% Upper-middle Income Lower-middle Income 20% Low Income 10% Rest of world 0% 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 50 00 50 00 50 00 50 00 50 00 50 1,0 1,5 7,0 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Population (million) Source: World Bank Since 2010, 16 of the world’s top 20 access-deficit countries expanded electrification at a rate faster than the global average, but none of them achieved the world average access rate FIGURE 2.11 • The 20 countries with the largest access-deficit over the 2010-2016 period World Average, 0.64 pp 100 90 World Average, 87.35% Access rate 2016 (% of total population) 80 India Bangladesh 70 60 Nigeria Myanmar Kenya 50 Angola Korea, Dem. Ethiopia 40 Sudan People's Rep. Zambia Mali Tanzania 30 Madagascar Upper-middle Income Uganda Lower-middle Income 20 Niger Mozambique Low Income 10Malawi Burkina Faso Bubble size is proportional to access deficit. Congo, Dem. Rep. Chad 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 Annualized average change, 2010-2016 (percentage points) Source: World Bank 23 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Of the world’s 20 least electrified countries, fifteen have been able to expand electrification more rapidly than the world average consistently since 2010 FIGURE 2.12 • The 20 least-electrified countries over the 2010-2016 tracking period Annualized increase in Access deficit, 2016 (million) Access rate, 2016 (%) access 2010-2016 (pp) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Burundi 9.7 7.6 0.38 Chad 13.2 8.8 0.41 South Sudan 11.1 8.9 1.24 Malawi 16.1 11.0 0.38 Central African Republic 4.0 14.0 0.70 Guinea-Bissau 1.5 14.7 1.44 Niger 17.3 16.2 0.58 Congo, Dem. Rep. 65.2 17.1 0.72 Burkina Faso 15.1 19.2 1.01 Liberia 3.7 19.8 2.44 Sierra Leone 5.9 20.3 1.47 Madagascar 19.2 22.9 1.00 Papua New Guinea 6.2 22.9 0.57 Mozambique 21.9 24.2 1.16 Uganda 30.4 26.7 1.99 Zambia 12.1 27.2 0.87 Rwanda 8.4 29.4 3.28 Lesotho 1.5 29.7 1.80 Somalia 10.0 29.9 1.59 Tanzania 37.3 32.8 3.00 World Average, 4.32 million World Average, 87.35% World Average, 0.64 pp Source: World Bank The world’s 20 fastest-moving countries have consistently managed to electrify 2-5 percent of their population annually since 2010; even more in some cases FIGURE 2.13 • The 20 fastest moving countries over the 2010-2016 tracking period Annualized increase in Access deficit, 2016 (million) Access rate, 2016 (%) access 2010-2016 (pp) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Kosovo 0.0 100 16.7 Afghanistan 5.5 84 6.9 Kenya 21.3 56 6.1 Bhutan 0.0 100 4.5 Timor-Leste 0.5 63 4.2 Nepal 2.7 91 4.0 Kiribati 0.0 85 3.6 Vanuatu 0.1 58 3.5 Bangladesh 39.2 76 3.4 Swaziland 0.5 66 3.4 Rwanda 8.4 29 3.3 Cambodia 7.9 50 3.1 Tanzania 37.3 33 3.0 Ethiopia 58.5 43 3.0 Lao PDR 0.9 87 2.8 Togo 4.0 47 2.7 Solomon Islands 0.3 48 2.6 Comoros 0.2 78 2.5 Liberia 3.7 20 2.4 Ghana 5.8 79 2.4 World Average, 4.32 million World Average, 87.35% World Average, 0.64 pp Source: World Bank 24 Chapter 2 – Electrification Since 2010, 43 countries achieved universal electrification, while a further 20 countries expanded their electrification at a pace that can be considered rapid by historic standards. FIGURE 2.14 • Annual increase in electricity access rate in 2010-2016 (pp) in access deficit countries Achieved universal access between 2010-2016 Annual access growth rate falling Annual access growth rate above 2 percentage points Top 20 Access Deficit Countries Annual access growth rate between 0 and 2 percentage points Source: World Bank POLICY IMPLICATIONS Energy access is inexorably tied to human well-being—powering household and income-generating activities. SDG 7 sets the target of universal access to affordable, reliable, and modern energy services by 2030. Electricity is a subset of energy services, making universal electrification a national priority in the 98 countries around the world that have yet to reach this objective. SDG 7 is currently under review by the United Nations (UN): Policy Brief #1, “Ensuring Universal Access to Electricity,” and Policy Brief #24, “Energy Sector Transformation: Decentralized Renewable Energy for Universal Energy Access,” outline priority actions on electrification. In 2016, the world steadily progressed toward universal access to electricity, with the global electrification rate reaching 87.4%—up from 85.7% in 2014. For the first time since 1990, global access breached the symbolic threshold of 1 billion in 2016—falling slightly from 1.04 billion in 20144. Although this growth is encouraging, the pace of electrification in the coming years will need to further accelerate to meet the 2030 targets. According to the New Policies Scenario of the International Energy Agency (IEA), an estimated 674 million will be without electricity in 2030. 4 These estimates are based on the World Bank methodology using electrification rates reported in national surveys and modeled estimates for years where sur- veys are unavailable. IEA’s estimate for the global electricity access-deficit in 2016 amounts to 1.06 billion people, with the main difference stemming primarily from estimates for India. A comparison with the IEA’s Energy Access Database (IEA 2017; www.iea.org/sdg/), which primarily relies on government estimates based on utility connections, is described in box 2.1. 25 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Consistent with earlier trends, progress has been most rapid in developing Asia, where electrification continues to outstrip population growth by a substantial margin. Electrification also exceeded population growth slightly in Sub-Saharan Africa for the first time in 2014–16.5 Although urban electrification at 97% is substantially ahead of rural electrification at 76%, rural electrification is rising more rapidly reflecting much lower population growth in rural areas. These results are consistently derived from official household surveys run by national statistical agencies. The underlying methodological basis is explained briefly in box 2.1, and described in much greater detail in the methodology section. The figures cited above provide a headline view of electricity access globally, but it is also fair to say that they leave a number of important questions unanswered. As a result, it is increasingly helpful to shed further light on electricity access trends by triangulating between various complementary sources of information. A detailed triangulation exercise was conducted for each of the top 20 access-deficit countries, comparing electrification rates derived from household surveys with utility connection rates and estimated penetration of solar energy, as well as IEA estimates of electricity access. A full report on each of these 20 countries is provided in annex 2, with an overview of results provided below. BOX 2.1 • MEASURING ELECTRIFICATION: COMPARING WORLD BANK AND IEA ELECTRICITY ACCESS DATABASES The World Bank and IEA each maintains a country-by-country database of global electricity access rates. The former, included in the Global Tracking Framework, derives estimates from a suite of standardized household surveys that are conducted in most countries every two to three years, with a multilevel nonparametric model used to extrapolate for missing years. The IEA Energy Access Database sources data where possible from government-reported values for household electrification (usually based on utility connections), supplemented with a new measurement of off-grid access. Each database gives different and important quantifications of electrification, and the IEA and World Bank together are working on a comparison and reconciliation exercise, toward a joint database of electrification estimates derived from surveys, modeled results, utility connections, and differentiating aspects such as off- grid and informal connections. The IEA and World Bank are endeavoring to present this analysis, and ultimately a fully combined and integrated database, over time; annex 2B presents a rich portrayal that integrates the different measures of electrification over time for the top 20 access-deficit countries globally, and serves to highlight the value of having a variety of complementary measures of electrification analysis. The high-level finding of this exercise is that the global messages are consistent across the two databases. Most notably, each observes an acceleration in electrification over recent years, driven primarily by progress in Asia. Each also observes promise in Sub-Saharan Africa, where electrification efforts have begun to outpace population growth for the first time. According to IEA measurements, this turning point happened in 2013; in the World Bank database, it happened in 2015. This difference is largely accounted for by differences in recent estimates for Kenya. A more detailed finding is that estimates for some individual countries can differ significantly. This is especially the case for India, which accounts for the main difference in population without access. Both databases report very rapid progress; however, access levels based on household surveys are moderately higher than those based on energy sector data (as is typical) because they capture a wider range of phenomena including informality and self-supply. Estimates for some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa also differ significantly, especially for 5 The World Energy Outlook reported that electrification efforts have been outpacing population growth since 2014 in Sub-Saharan Africa, and estimated slower pace of access gains in developing Asia (IEA 2017). 26 Chapter 2 – Electrification Kenya, which has also been making rapid progress but where there is divergence between different sources of data. These discrepancies point to the need to invest in better data and statistics within the country. Finally, the analysis also highlights different strengths associated with each of the two approaches to measuring electrification, underscoring the value of having both types of measures available. Household surveys, typically conducted by the national statistical agency of each country, offer two distinct advantages when it comes to measuring electrification. First, because of longstanding international efforts to harmonize questionnaire design, there is a high degree of standardization of electrification questions across country surveys conducted by international development agencies such as the United Nations Children’s Fund and the U.S. Agency for International Development. This brings the benefit of consistency, allowing meaningful comparisons of electrification to be made across countries and over time. Although not all surveys reveal detailed information on the forms of electricity access, as the market evolves survey questionnaire designs can and are being updated to better reflect important emerging phenomena such as off-grid solar access. A salient example is the Multi-Tier Framework surveys maintained in this chapter. This kind of standardization does not necessarily exist with administrative data on electrification because governments may follow different conventions regarding what kind of electrification is counted in official statistics, whether village-level or household-level electrification is reported, the geographic area for which access is reported, and assumptions about population and household size. All of these issues can significantly affect the comparability of administrative data between countries. Second, data from surveys convey a user-centric perspective on electrification. Using survey data captures all of the electricity access forms, painting a more complete picture of access than may be possible from service provider data. Households can be expected to respond positively to having electricity, whether they obtain the service from the grid or some other decentralized sources and whether they are formal customers or obtaining electricity informally. In addition, because survey data incorporate information on a wide array of household characteristics, it becomes possible to examine electricity access patterns across different socioeconomic segments of the population: urban and rural, rich and poor, and male- and female-headed households. Administrative data on electrification reported by the ministry of energy in each country convey the electrification status from the perspective of supply-side data on utility connections. Although not published by every government, these kinds of data offer two principal advantages when available. First, administrative data are often available on an annual basis and, for this reason, may be more up to date than surveys, which are typically updated only every two to three years, necessitating model estimates in intervening years. One prominent example, again, is the case of India, which has put a great level of emphasis on transparency as it seeks to deliver universal electricity access and which reports in real time the number of utility connections at the household and village levels1. Second, administrative data are not subject to the challenges that can arise when implementing surveys in the field. Some household surveys may suffer from sampling errors, particularly in remote rural areas, which could lead to a significant underestimation of the access-deficit. For example, India’s 2011 census reported an electrification rate of 55% in rural areas, but the parallel National Sample Survey of 2011/2012 reported a 74% rate, implying that the sample survey overestimated electricity access by about 180 million people. In addition, responses to survey questions may be sensitive to the precise language used to pose survey questions. For example, the question “Does your household have an electricity connection?” may elicit a different perspective on the household’s electrification status than would another question, such as “What is the primary source of lighting?” Survey has not developed a consistent methodology to treat off-grid access, which is becoming a more significant factor. This discussion helps to illustrate the complexity of measuring electrification, as well as the value of having multiple sources of information on which to base any assessment of progress toward universal access. Much remains to be done to improve the quality and availability of both survey and administrative data on electrification at the national level, pointing to the importance of investment in data collection systems and statistics capacity building within countries. 1 For more information, see tp://saubhagya.gov.in/. 27 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 TRACKING OFF-GRID SOLAR ELECTRIFICATION An important trend in electrification today is the upswing of low-cost off-grid solar electricity; one of the most important policy questions is whether solar off-grid access is materially accelerating the pace of electrification, particularly in rural areas. Although sales of small devices have witnessed a stable growth, sales of larger solutions have increased by over 85% annually since 2014, mainly driven by pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) financing (IFC 2018). IEA’s Energy for All case estimates about 60% of the people becoming electrified between 2017 and 2030 will do so through decentralized systems, equally distributed between mini-grids and off-grid solutions based on solar photovoltaic (PV). While it is known anecdotally that off-grid solar is making major strides, at least in some developing countries, the phenomenon remains difficult to measure. In many places, off-grid solar is a decentralized private sector initiative that is not captured in official statistics. Also, with a wide array of solar products available from small lanterns to substantial home systems, it is not always clear which solar products should count toward electricity access. There are two emerging sources of evidence on the scale of the solar access phenomenon, each with its limitations. First, new work by IRENA, described in box 2.2, presents an initial comprehensive picture of off-grid solar access derived from industry data on the sales of solar panels. The results suggest that the majority of those currently benefitting from off-grid solar electricity—some 115 million in all—use the basic energy services provided by solar lights of under 11-watt capacity. In about nine countries at least 10% of the population benefits from these systems (see figure 2.15). In addition, a further 26 million obtain the equivalent of Tier 1 energy access either through solar home systems or connection to a solar mini-grid. Confining attention to this more meaningful level of energy access, a handful of countries (Bangladesh, Fiji, Mongolia, Nepal, Rwanda, and Uganda) stand out as having reached 3–9% of their populations with this form of access in 2016 (see figure 2.15). At the same time, the IRENA dataset also highlights 24 other access-deficit countries in which penetration of solar energy at Tier 1 and above remains negligible, indicating that many countries have yet to take advantage of this form of solar access. By way of comparison, the IEA estimates that 33 million people currently benefit from electricity access with off- grid renewables and mini-grid solutions (IEA 2017). This is broadly comparable to the number reported by IRENA. The pace of solar electrification has been accelerating: an estimated 5 million people have gained access each year through this route since 2012, compared with about 1 million on average between 2000 and 2012. Although more than double the number of people benefitting from decentralized renewable energy (DRE) live in Asia than in Sub-Saharan Africa, the acceleration is happening most rapidly in Africa. Off-grid solutions, such as solar home systems, make up the bulk of the decentralized systems being deployed, but the role for mini-grids is expected to increase. This first global assessment is based on government reported figures and solar home system sales data, and includes only sales of solar home systems with battery storage to provide a basic bundle of energy services initially6 and of increasing over time. Second, although household surveys typically capture electricity from all sources, including solar, only a small proportion of existing household surveys ask specifically about the source of electricity access. This makes it challenging to precisely quantify how much access is provided globally through solar sources. For example, Afghanistan’s National Risk and Vulnerability Survey observed that the population obtaining electricity through 6 A basic bundle of energy services is defined by IEA as, at a minimum, several light bulbs, task lighting (such as a flashlight), phone charging, and a radio. 28 Chapter 2 – Electrification off-grid solar grew from 0.1% in 2005 to 40% in 2014. Because of civil conflicts, the Republic of Yemen’s latest 2017 household survey reported 55% of households relied on solar PV as the primary source of lighting, whereas only 0.5% of households relied on electricity through the grid.7 In addition, Yemen’s market survey in 2017 reported solar PV penetration at 75% of households in urban areas and 50% in rural areas (Mahmoud et al. 2017). Kiribati’s census found that over 53% of the population in the country used solar home systems in 2015—three times more than in 2010. As these examples illustrate, in small island developing states and in fragile and conflict-affected states, the potential exists to make rapid progress with solar electrification in ways that have not previously been possible with grid extension. Nevertheless, the tier of access being provided to these households is not clearly indicated in the surveys, and may not necessarily correspond to the Tier 1 threshold. FIGURE 2.15 • Top 20 countries with highest off-grid solar access rate below and above Tier 1, 2016 a. Top 20 countries with highest off-grid access rate (Tier 1 and above) 9 connected 8 Large Mini-grids (> Tier 1) supply (%) a. Top 20 countries with highest off-grid access rate (Tier 1 and above) 7 9 Small Mini-grids ( Tier1) connected of total population 6 8 Large Solar Home Mini-grids Tier 1) (> 50W) (>System (%) 5 Solar Home System (11-50W) solar 7 Small Mini-grids ( Tier1) supply 4 total population 6 Large Solar Home System (> 50W) off-grid 3 5 Small Solar Home System (11-50W) to solar 2 4 1 to off-grid Share ofShare 3 0 2 sh lia l Ug i da da a a am o a a en ia a n ka u M au s i u l j al pa ga ve ny el ni di si Fi c r ni 1 r Pe oc n de M go s an an ge ni ne zu Ne za bo Be di is Ke La or Tu la on Al Rw B al an e Se ri a- a M ng 0 M a T n S ka ine co C ria V Ba La Gu sh lia l Ug i da da a a a s i u l j al pa ga ve ny el ni di si Fi sa r ni Pe oc n de M go an an ge ni ne zu Ne za bo Be di is Ke Source: IRENA 2018. World Bank World Development Indicators database. or Tu la on Al Rw -B al n ne Se m i Ta M ng M Sr ea M Ca Ve Ba in Gu b. Top 20 countries with highest share of solar lighting system (below Tier 1) FIGURE 2.15 • Top 20 countries with highest off-grid solar access rate below and above Tier 1, 2016 (continued) 35 Solar lights (< 11 W) b. Top 20 countries with highest share of solar lighting system (below Tier 1) connected 30 35 supply (%) 25 Solar lights (< 11 W) connected 30 of total population 20 (%) 25 solar supply 15 total population 20 off-grid 10 to solar 15 5 to off-grid Share ofShare 10 0 5 a Rwapu a Rw a da ea Va n Va n u a e n l kin al so a da i a e i ria gh ste fgh ste n aw al ny i pi bw bi di on at a ni ta g an Fa in M rd an an be ne e io m In Be is nu al Ke Le ba -L nz Gu Jo an Ug Za th a Li M 0 Se or Ta m a u E w a rr riaTim ia Zi daNe ga ur di ie e A In S ne B a ea e n so a da i e i n an a aw al ny P ni bw bi on at a ni ta op Fa in M rd an be a m Be is nu al Ke Le ba -L nz Gu hi Jo an Ug Za a Li M Se or in Et Ta m ra w rk m Zi er Ne Af Ti Bu Si a pu Pa Source: IRENA 2018 World Bank World Development Indicators database. 7 Data come from the World Food Program, WFP mobile survey, November 2017. 29 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 BOX 2.2 • A NEW DATABASE ON OFF-GRID SOLAR ELECTRIFICATION One part of the energy sector that has grown rapidly in recent years is the use of solar panels by households and enterprises to meet their own needs for electricity. These uses are often missing from official supply side energy statistics, but the growth in off-grid solar electricity production can be seen in the solar panel import statistics of many countries. IRENA has been monitoring these statistics and estimates that about 1 918 MW of off-grid solar PV capacity existed at the end of 2016 (IRENA, 2017). During 2017, IRENA collected more detailed data about off-grid solar power developments to check the reliability of these estimates, identify end-uses and estimate the numbers of people using these sources of renewable energy (IRENA, 2018). Data sources included the Global Off-Grid Lighting Association (GOGLA), surveys of solar light and solar home system (SHS) sales, the OECD-DAC database of development projects, national and regional power plant databases, off-grid data reported on IRENA questionnaires and information obtained through organizations such as REN21 and the Alliance for Rural Electrification. The data collected from these sources included information about 180,000 off-grid solar power plants and 650 records of annual sales of solar devices, with the data covering over 40% of the currently estimated off-grid solar PV capacity (839 MW). To estimate capacity and the numbers of people using off-grid solar power, these data points were aggregated over time for each country, technology and end-use, with adjustments to the data to avoid over-estimation. So, for example, to estimate the number of solar lights and SHS used in any year, annual sales were aggregated for a limited number of previous years to reflect the lifetime of these products (3 years for solar lights and 6 or 10 years for small or large SHS). Similarly, for mini-grids, the number of household connections was used as the measure of the population served rather than the total population in the location of the mini-grid and, for older plants, checks were made to confirm that these plants are still functioning and could be included in the analysis. As figure B2.2.1 shows, almost all of the growth in the use of off-grid solar power has occurred in the last five years. Countries in Africa and Asia account for most this growth, with about 60 million people in Africa and 78 million in Asia now using such power sources. While these trends are dominated by the use of solar lights, it’s also worth noting that about 10% of the population served in Africa obtain a higher level of energy services from off-grid solar (Tier 1 Access or more) and, in Asia, the share is even higher at 25%. The diversity of energy sources now available also reinforces the need for household surveys to include these technologies in questions about the types of energy used for lighting, cooking and other activities. FIGURE B2.2.1 • Off-grid solar access rate by region (Tier 1 access and above) Off-grid solar access rate by region 5.0 4.5 Africa Percentage (%) of total population Asia 4.0 Middle East South America 3.5 Oceania 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: IRENA, 2018 30 Chapter 2 – Electrification TRACKING AFFORDABILITY AND RELIABILITY SDG 7 speaks specifically of access to affordable, reliable, modern, and sustainable energy for all. The electrification indicators currently used to report on progress provide the overall status of electrification without being able to shed light on these different attributes of electricity service, which in practice matter a great deal to governments and households alike. Moreover, when service attributes such as affordability and reliability come into focus, the universal access goal becomes relevant to all countries, regardless of whether or not they have yet to achieve universal electrification. Although affordability is ideally measured at the household level, a preliminary sense of the affordability of electricity supply in any particular country can be obtained by examining the cost of purchasing the average residential electricity consumption for that country, normalized against the total monthly expenditures of the poorest 40% of the population. A widely used benchmark is that electricity is affordable when it accounts for no more than 5% of a household’s monthly expenditures in countries with tropical climates; this threshold typically increases to 10% of expenditure in temperate climates where electricity may also be used for heating purposes. This metric allows for wide variation in access to affordable electricity in both access-deficit and fully electrified countries. In general, electricity is more affordable in fully electrified countries where incomes are typically higher. As a result, electricity expenditures of the bottom 40% in electrified countries amount on average to 4% of their budget, compared to 8% in access-deficit countries. Nevertheless, in 2015, some 30% of the population in universal access countries spent more than 5% of their monthly expenditure on electricity, indicating affordability challenges. These challenges are far greater in access-deficit countries where almost twice as high a share of the population (57%) spent more than 5%. The countries with the least affordable electricity are primarily in Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Sub-Saharan Africa (figure 2.16). FIGURE 2.16 • Household expenditure on electricity as a share of GNI per household of bottom 40% 200 Expenditure on household electricity consumption (USD/montn) 180 United States 160 140 United Arab Emirates Sweden 120 Saudi Arabia Australia 100 Germany Japan 80 Spain Iceland Montenegro Qatar Uruguay 60 Canada Dominican Republic Bahrain Argentina 40 New Zealand Serbia Austria Macedonia, FYR South Africa Nigeria Colombia Albania Senegal India Jamaica Philippines 20 Myanmar Bangladesh Armenia Nicaragua Congo, Dem. Rep. Angola Pakistan Congo, Rep. Haiti Tanzania Benin Mozambique 0 Kenya Ethiopia 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% % GNI per Household for Average Residential Electricity Consumption Source: World Bank RISE, WDI, IEA, UN Statistics 31 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Turning to reliability, this is defined as the absence of unpredictable power outages and is an important attribute of the customer experience. Where adequate information systems exist, the impact of reliability on the use of electricity services is typically measured by utilities through a combination of two indexes: frequency of outages using the System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) and duration of outages using the System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI). Evidence on these two attributes is available for 72 universal-access countries and 66 access-deficit countries from the World Bank’s Getting Electricity database. The 2015 results show a strong correlation between SAIDI and SAIFI indexes, suggesting that the more frequent the outages the longer they tend to last. Because countries with universal access typically provide a highly reliable service, attention focuses on access-deficit countries. Of the access-deficit countries, about 9% have such unreliable service that their grid electricity would not provide a very meaningful form of electricity access. Some of the most egregious examples are Eritrea, Comoros, Nigeria, and Iraq—each with over 40 disruptions weekly (see figure 2.17). FIGURE 2.17 • Average number of disruptions and duration in access deficit countries 2015 Average for access deficit countries 40 Eritrea Duration of disuptions (minutes per week) 30 20 Iraq Comoros Average for access Swaziland South Sudan defict countries 10 Nigeria Pakistan Zimbabwe Papua New Guinea Honduras 0 Niger 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 Number of disruptions per week >14 disruptions per week 3-14 disruptions per week <3 disruptions per week (1% Avg. annual increase >0% and <=1% Avg. annual decrease <=0% and >=-1% Avg. annual decrease <-1% Top 20 Energy Consumption Countries Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) and United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) data 67 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 POLICY IMPLICATIONS Without significant additional effort to deploy renewable energy beyond the electricity sector, the world is unlikely to achieve the goal of substantially increasing the share of renewable energy in global TFEC by 2030 as foreseen under the United Nations SDG 7 commitment. Although renewable energy’s share did outpace total TFEC growth in 2015, the fact that it did so at a slower pace than before is a concern. The slower total renewable energy growth pace was influenced, in part, by declines in global hydropower. However, as 50% of the growth in renewable energy consumption came from bioenergy, of which the majority was driven by traditional uses of biomass, the actual growth rate of modern renewable energy was lower than the headline numbers. This growth is still too low for the world to achieve the SDG 7 target. Latest results show that the global share of renewable energy in TFEC has barely risen, up by 0.8 of a percentage point between 2010 and 2015, and increased only marginally by 0.15 percentage points since 2014 to reach 17.5% in 2015. In fact, the pace at which the renewable energy share of TFEC is expanding has slowed since 2012. During the 2014–15 period, the share of renewable energy in TFEC actually declined in 114 countries1—that is, over half. In 68 of these 114 countries, renewable energy consumption even fell in absolute terms. The explanations underlying these trends relate to TFEC growth, traditional use of biomass, and climate fluctuations. A major reason for the slow increase in the renewable energy share is the continuing steady growth of global TFEC, reinforcing the need for greater progress on energy efficiency and for tighter integration of energy efficiency and renewable energy goals. In 164 countries, an absolute increase in TFEC during 2014–2015 makes it significantly harder to increase the renewable energy share in total TFEC. This helps to explain why the renewable energy share has increased only slowly, despite a major expansion in the world’s absolute consumption of renewable energy. During the period 2014–15 the world’s renewable energy consumption grew by 1.16 exajoules (EJ)—comparable to the current energy consumption of Bangladesh—despite significant declines in consumption of major fuels such as coal in China, Europe, and the United States in 2015. The second part of the challenge is that renewable energy consumption can sometimes decrease, whether for structural or meteorological reasons. In structural terms, assessing the overall progress toward SDG 7 can be complicated if the magnitude of traditional biomass uses in a country is large. For example, China’s share of renewable energy in TFEC fell from 30% in 2000 to 12% in 2015 because traditional biomass uses decreased; at the same time modern renewable energy in TFEC rose from 2.5% in 2000 to 7.6% in 2015. However, because the magnitude of traditional biomass uses was larger, the overall share of renewables appeared to decline; even though the underlying performance can be considered to represent positive progress toward SDG 7. Challenges exist also in recording certain energy sources precisely, affecting the accuracy of calculations of the share of renewables (box 5.1). Solid data collection across all energy sources, including diverse bioenergy sources and off-grid renewables, are necessary to develop an accurate national energy balance.2 In China, efforts to more accurately record traditional uses of biomass led to the significant revision of the 2015 dataset. This change follows an extensive methodological review conducted by the International Energy Agency (IEA) and institutions in China, which has resulted in a notable decrease in Chinese renewable energy consumption. On average, the 1 IEA/UNSD Data – Renewable energy share in TFEC for 2015 minus renewable energy share in TFEC for 2014. Include all countries where the change was lower than “-0.0000000000001” 2 Ideally, national energy balances should be consistent with the internationally agreed methodologies of International Recommendations for Energy Statistics (IRES). See https://unstats.un.org/unsd/energy/ires/. 68 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy data revision has reduced Chinese traditional uses of biomass by 2.5% per annum from 1990 to the end of 2014. The total difference is a 33.01 EJ decline in traditional use of biomass from 1990 to 2014, which materially affects the entire global renewable energy series since 1990. Additionally, renewable energy production is sensitive to the consumption levels of biomass for traditional uses in heat, as well as to climatic conditions that can fluctuate year on year. Most notably, hydropower output is strongly affected by precipitation levels, which can be above or below typical levels in any given year. Globally, hydropower production declined by 0.5% in 2015, in part due to droughts caused by the El Niño phenomenon in certain regions. In fact, in 2015, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported “a near- record area of global land surfaces in some state of drought,” with 14% of land on earth experiencing “Severe Drought” in 2015.3 However, this decline in hydropower was offset by increases in bioenergy consumption (both in modern and traditional uses), wind, and solar. Against the backdrop of declining hydro output in 2015 is the significant fact that 70% of new renewable energy consumption in 2014–15 came from non-hydro renewable energy sources, overwhelmingly driven by progress in China, Europe, and North America. Finally, sector-level analysis shows that, although the expansion of renewable electricity is progressing well, the main bottlenecks to global growth of renewable energy share in TFEC are in the transport and heat end-uses. In 2015, similar to previous years, electricity accounts for only 20% of global TFEC. This illustrates the importance of greater attention by policy makers to the deployment of renewable energy in heat and transport.. BOX 4.1 • IMPROVING RENEWABLE ENERGY DATA CAPACITY Careful data monitoring is essential for policy makers as a basis for their interventions to address the ways to achieve all the targets of SDG 7. For the renewables target, calculating the share of renewables in total energy consumption requires robust data collection processes across all energy sources to develop a solid national energy balance, which in turn leads to well-measured SDG 7 renewables indicators. In this regard, greater resources to enhance renewable energy data collection capacity, in particular for biomass uses and off-grid applications, which are the most difficult to trace, are highly desirable. One area where statistical approaches could be enhanced is through greater use of surveys—potentially conducted jointly by statistical offices and energy ministries or governmental agencies with specialized knowledge of renewables and off-grid sector—so as to guarantee proper survey design. Given the significant role of solid biomass in renewables consumption and the expanding role of off-grid renewable solutions, and the relation of both of these to energy access (both in electrification and clean cooking), enhanced data collection methods will be essential to strengthen the accuracy of SDG 7 reporting, and toshape future energy policy. 3 Emily Greenhalgh, 2016, NOAA, “2015 State of the Climate: Drought”, https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/2015-state-climate-drought 69 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 REGIONAL AND INCOME GROUP TRENDS Improvements in energy efficiency make it easier for renewables to reach a target share of TFEC because greater efficiency lowers the energy demand. Overall, developed economies have a slow average growth of TFEC at 0.7% per annum, and as many as 30 developed economies were consuming less energy in 2015 than in 2010. Under these circumstances, expansion of renewable energy can have a discernible impact on a country’s renewable energy share, highlighting the links between SDG targets 7.2 and 7.3. By contrast, developing economies have a much faster growth of TFEC at 3.3% that makes it more difficult to grow their renewable energy share, even where significant efforts are made to promote renewable energy uptake. As of 2015, there were 95 countries experiencing TFEC growth that outpaced their growth in renewable energy. However, China and Brazil had the opposite experience thanks to their significant investments in modern renewable energy, coupled with a simultaneous decrease in fossil fuel consumption. In structural terms, low-income economies are heavily dependent on traditional uses of biomass for cooking and heating applications. As a result, many countries source as much as 82%4 of their energy consumption from biomass, of which a significant proportion is neither collected nor consumed in a sustainable manner. As they move into the middle-income bracket, these economies shift toward more modern sources of household energy, often substituting fossil fuels for traditional uses of biomass. This is particularly clear in cooking end uses, where the SDG 7.1.2 indicator emphasizes the importance of clean fuels and technologies for cooking, often achieved by substituting renewable biomass with liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), at the expense of a country’s renewable energy share as captured by the SDG 7.2 target. This also implies that expansion of modern renewable FIGURE 4.18 • Global wind energy consumption uses in these countries needs to offset reductions in the remains concentrated traditional biomass uses and simultaneously outpace Global Wind energy consumption 2015 (% of world total) the expansion of TFEC. For example, traditional uses of 24% biomass account for about half of renewable energy consumption in a number of top 20 energy-consuming countries from the developing world, including India, 45% Indonesia, and Nigeria (see Figure 4.17). Moreover, a number of countries experienced a reduction in dependence on traditional uses of biomass between 22% 2014 and 2015. Brazil, China, Indonesia, and Thailand all reduced their consumption of traditional uses of 9% biomass in 2015 compared to their 2014 consumption. People's Republic of China Germany Notably, Thailand’s reduction in traditional uses of United States Rest of the world biomass between 2014 and 2015 was greater than its entire consumption of hydroelectric power for 2015.5. 4 IEA/UNSD data for Low-Income Group data; see [[AQ: add links here]]. Traditional uses of biomass 2015 data divided by TFEC 2015 data: average for 2015 was 82% from 14 countries. 5 Thailand consumed 600 PJ of biomass in traditional uses in 2015, against 619PJ in 2014. Thailand’s total hydro consumption for 2015 was 16.7 PJ. 70 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY The most encouraging area of progress during 2014–15 has been the continued rapid expansion of the renewable energy share in the electricity sector. Although hydropower remained the dominant source of renewable electricity (accounting for 70% of total renewable electricity consumption), the percentage share of renewable energy in TFEC increased from 22.4% to 22.8% over 2014–15, thanks to wind and solar (see figures 5.18 and 5.19). Combined, these two technologies accounted for 70% of the expansion in renewable electricity. However, the growth has not been equally distributed, with the bulk of global wind and solar electricity growth driven by China, Germany, and the United States. Thanks to technological improvements and falling costs, wind and solar are now becoming cost-comparable with conventional generation sources in an increasing number of markets. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the levelized cost of energy for solar photovoltaic (PV) fell 69% between 2010 and 2016, with new solar PV now cheaper than nuclear in developed economies (IRENA 2018). This is also the consequence of the increased role of competitively set remuneration mechanisms, such as auctions. According to the World Bank’s RISE data, Chile and South Africa held several renewable energy auctions between 2012 and 2014, which cumulatively secured over 3.5 gigawatts (GW) of capacity. This capacity contributed to growth during 2014–15, with wind consumption increasing by 40% in Chile and 160% FIGURE 4.19 • Global solar energy consumption is in South Africa, and solar consumption increasing by driven by China 84% in Chile and 50% in South Africa.6 Global Solar energy consumption 2015 (% of world total) However, despite the growth of market-driven capacity additions, the bulk of modern renewable electricity growth in 2015 was due to the existence of alternative financial incentives including tax credits and feed-in 33% 50% tariffs. These incentives accounted for over 70% of new capacity installed in 2016, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA) (IEA 2017a, 142). 7% 10% The immediate future for Renewable electricity is that People's Republic of China Germany growth is expected to continue. IEA’s Renewables 2017 United States Rest of the world report forecasts that over 920 GW of renewable energy will be added to global power systems between 2016 and 2022, with wind and solar accounting for over 80% of new additions (IEA 2017a). A number of new geothermal projects being considered globally may materialize in the coming years, alongside major expansions of new hydro projects and bioenergy solutions. One previous limitation to the deployment of variable generation technologies, such as wind and solar PV, has been integrating the variable output of these technologies into the grid. As IEA noted in its Renewables 2017 report, “Without a simultaneous increase in system flexibility (grid reinforcement and interconnections, storage, demand-side response, and other flexible supply), variable renewables are more exposed to the risk of losing system value at increasing shares of market penetration” (IEA 2017a). However, in some European countries such as Denmark, Germany, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, grid operators have been able to manage the loads across networks (IEA 2017a). Because of its connection with other Nordic countries, Denmark now generates 44% of its electricity from variable renewable sources (IEA 2017a). 6 Both sets of auction data are drawn from the World Bank RISE website. http://rise.esmap.org/country/south-africa and http://rise.esmap.org/country/chile 71 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 RENEWABLE HEAT In 2015 heat demand accounted for 48% of global TFEC, and the share of renewable heat reached 25% in 2015, up from 24% in 2014. Renewable heat7 can come from either traditional uses of biomass or modern forms of renewable heat, which include modern uses of biomass such as high-efficiency boilers. Within modern renewable heat, renewable energy for heat can be further classified as used for either district heating or direct uses. In 2015, 66.1% of renewable heat came from traditional uses of biomass (Figure 4.20), whereas modern uses represented 1.4% in district heating and 32.5% in direct use. Traditional uses of biomass accounted for 75% of the absolute increase between 2014 and 2015, and the fastest growth came from modern renewable energy in district heating, which increased by 3.4% over 2014–2015. The renewable energy share also increased because of a small decline in TFEC between 2014 and 2015.. FIGURE 4.20 • Global renewable energy in heat is dominated by traditional uses of biomass. Global renewable energy Heat consumption by type in 2015 1.2% 0.1% 2.9% 0.4% 0.9% 4.1% Traditional Uses of Solid Biomass 27.8% Modern Uses of Solid Biomass Charcoal Renewable Municipal Waste Other Liquid Biofuels Biogases Solar Thermal 62.6% Geothermal What constitutes traditional uses of biomass? Traditional uses of biomass include the use of solid biomass for cooking and heating, such as use of wood or animal waste in an open fire, with fuel that is often informally harvested. By contrast, modern renewable heat is produced from bioenergy, solar thermal, or geothermal energy. Most of it is consumed directly in the residential sector or in industry. This can include bioenergy technologies (biomass, biogas), but it may also include other technologies such as solar water heaters and direct use of geothermal heat in industry or district heating. Additionally, a small amount of renewable heat is formally sold as an energy commodity. The most common example is the use of different types of solid biomass for local district heating schemes, notably the use of woodchips or wood pellets. Because of the significant role of traditional uses of biomass in the heat end uses in developing economies, the world’s top 20 countries ranked by total final renewable heat consumption in 2015, were almost exclusively developing economies in Sub-Saharan Africa, with the exceptions of Cambodia, Guatemala, Haiti, and Paraguay. Since renewable heat comes predominantly from traditional uses of biomass, it is particularly affected by structural trends whereby developing economies are substituting traditional uses of biomass with modern forms 7 In this report renewable heat refers to the use of biomass, solar thermal, or geothermal energy for heat end uses (space and water heating, cooking, process heat) in the buildings, industry, and agriculture sectors. This can be either through individual applications or in district heating. 72 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy of energy, often fossil fuels. In fact, the global growth rate of traditional uses of biomass in the heat end use has fallen from 4% per annum during 1990–2014, to 1% per annum during 2014–15. BOX 4.2 • IMPROVEMENTS IN CHINA’S BIOMASS STATISTICS Since 2016, IEA has been working with the Institute of Built Environment of Tsinghua University, Beijing, to improve its understanding and hence data on solid biomass consumption in the residential sector in China. Tsinghua University implemented an initial residential survey in 2006–07, and data were updated thanks to a new survey conducted in 2015.a As a result of these findings and from discussion with staff involved in the surveys, IEA’s solid biomass figures for China have therefore been revised in the 2017 edition back to the year 1997 to reflect a decreasing trend in the last decade that was not apparent in previous editions. The resulting residential consumption of solid biomass is lower than in previous editions for the most recent years. For example, 2014 levels are 56% lower for solid biomass consumption in residential, 26% lower for total energy consumption in residential, and 44% lower for the overall share of renewable energy in total final consumption. IEA is now working even more closely with its main data provider, the National Bureau of Statistics, and with a wider range of organizations with an aim of improving data for the country. As a result, revisions may occur as the work to improve and understand national energy statistics is further enhanced. a Short descriptions of the surveys are available at http://www.iea.org/eeindicatorsmanual/rsu06.php; http://www.iea.org/eeindicatorsmanual/rsu07.php. More information on the urban survey is available in BERC 2017. Footnote 1: Short descriptions of the surveys are available at: http://www.iea.org/eeindicatorsmanual/rsu06.php; http://www.iea.org/eeindicatorsmanual/rsu07.php. More information on the urban survey is available in “China Building Energy Use 2017, Building Energy Research Center of Tsinghua University”. Several large developing economies have begun the transition toward modern sources of energy for heat. In 2015, traditional uses of biomass have declined in 33 developing countries compared to their consumption in 2010. Some countries have had significant success in converting their biomass to modern uses8: for example, in Brazil, as of 2015, 43% of renewable heat consumption was modern and only 8% based on traditional uses of biomass. Others have taken longer, such as China where 7.8% of renewable heat consumption in 2015 still came from traditional uses and only 3.3% of heat consumption was modern. Importantly though, among the top 20 largest consumers of biomass for traditional uses in 2015, only China, Indonesia and Thailand saw their demand fall between 2014 and 2015. Although the absolute growth rate of modern renewable energy in heat appears to have slowed during 2014–15, this is largely attributed to the weather (IEA 2017a). The annual average global growth rate of direct renewable energy consumption for heat was 1% during 1990–2014, but this rate fell to 0.96% over 2014–15. A similar pattern is observable for renewable energy in district heating, which grew at an annual average rate of 4.6% per annum from 1990 to the end of 2014, decelerating to 3.4% in 2014–15. Modern renewable heat lags behind electricity in terms of growth partly because of technological barriers, but the other challenge is securing strong policy support. In developed countries only Finland, Iceland, Latvia, and Sweden had more than 50% renewable energy penetration in total final heat consumption in 2015. This 8 According to IEA data, from 2010 to 2015, Brazil’s traditional biomass consumption fell by about 13%. 73 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 was achieved thanks to a combination of strong policy push and significant favorable resource endowments (geothermal in the case of Iceland and biomass in the other countries). Despite the growth of renewable energy in district heating, that growth remains highly concentrated in a few economies. The world’s top 10 largest consumers of renewable energy in district heating are almost all European (8 of 10), and together they consume 77% of total renewable energy in district heating. The single largest consumer is Sweden, which accounts for 18% of global renewable consumption in district heating in TFEC, greater than Austria, Iceland, the Russian Federation, and the United States combined.9 The highest percentage levels of direct use of modern renewable heat are concentrated among European economies or emerging countries that have been able to repurpose agricultural by-products by consuming them directly on-site for heat uses—for example, bagasse use in Brazil and several other countries. In emerging countries such as Gabon, biomass can be used for industrial heat purposes: in 2015, 64% of Gabon’s heat TFEC came from modern uses of biomass.10 Other countries have been able to use non-biomass technologies, such as solar water heaters in Greece, diverse solar thermal technologies in China, or geothermal in France and Japan. RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR TRANSPORT Data from the World Bank’s Sustainable Mobility for All report 2017, and from IEA’s World Energy Balances 2017, shows that transport accounts for about 30% of TFEC on a world average, but it remains the largest sector by final energy consumption for roughly 40 percent of countries worldwide (World Bank 2017; IEA 2017b). Although the penetration of biofuels in the transport sector is growing, it is starting from a very low base (see Figure 4.12). As a result, the share of renewable energy in TFEC within the transport sector has grown from 2.34% in 2010, to 2.81% in 2015, adding less than 0.1 percentage point to the renewable energy share annually. The largest factor driving the deployment of biofuels FIGURE 4.21 • The United States and Brazil are the in vehicles has been the use of biofuel blending major drivers of global renewable energy in transport.. mandates by policy makers. Accordingly, consumption Global Liquid Biofuel energy consumption 2015 can fluctuate depending on changes to targets and (% of world total) government provided subsidies. IEA reported data as of 2015 on biofuels consumption in transport for 59 countries. There were 21 among 29% 43% these that experienced an absolute decline in renewable energy in transport during 2014–15. The 4% top 10 largest consumers, however, added 185 PJ of renewable consumption, which represents 96% of all 23% new globally consumed renewable energy in transport between 2014 and 2015. United States France Brazil Rest of the world 9 These four countries represent the world’s 7th-, 8th-, 9th-, and 10th-largest consumers of renewable energy in district heating (in order: Austria, the United States, Russia, and Iceland). 10 According to data from the IEA Energy Balances, 73% of solid biomass used for energy in Gabon is consumed by Industry. 74 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy Alongside the broad increase in consumption from the world’s top 10 largest liquid biofuel consumers, there were significant achievements and setbacks in other nations. Both Iceland and Switzerland grew their share of renewable energy in transport TFEC by over 100% during 2014–15 (306% and 147% respectively),11 whereas the United Kingdom recorded the largest absolute decline of renewable energy in transport TFEC of any country over the same period, with consumption falling by 9.8 TJ (20%). Among the world’s top 20 energy-consuming countries, consumption of biofuels in India grew by 85% in absolute terms, whereas consumption fell in China by 7% and rose in the United States by 5%, all over the same 2014–15 period. The success of Brazil, France, Germany, and the United States in increasing their consumption of biofuels in transport has been largely due to the strength of their domestic agriculture and the provision of supportive government policy frameworks (see Figure 4.21). In the United States, the Renewable Fuel Standard set a target of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be blended with transport fuel by 2022.12 In Brazil, the government has an ethanol-blending mandate of 27%. However, most ethanol consumption is from unblended ethanol because of the country’s large flexible fuel vehicle fleet. Brazil also has a 10% biodiesel blending mandate (USDA 2017). The main sources of renewable energy in transport are bio-gasoline (fuel ethanol) and bio-diesel (biodiesel), which account for 87% of renewable transport TFEC in 2015. These are overwhelmingly consumed by light-duty vehicles in Brazil and the United States. Although the potential impact of electric vehicles on increasing the share of renewable energy in transport is large, as of 2015 there were fewer than 1 million electric vehicles in the 1.2 billion light-duty vehicle fleet. There are also a number of issues with measuring the contribution of electric vehicles to renewable energy share in transport, which are discussed in annex 4A. Outside of road transport, the prospect for increasing the global share of renewable energy in transport TFEC remains challenging. As IRENA (2015, 4) noted in its technology brief on shipping, the role of renewable energy will be “limited in the near and medium terms—even under optimistic scenarios.” Similarly, the IRENA (2017) technology brief on aviation noted that no alternative propulsion system, other than “biojet” fuels will be able to play a meaningful role in increasing the share of renewable energy in aviation before 2050. Even here, IRENA estimates that the total operational capacity of the world’s current HEFA diesel facilities would amount to less than 1.5% of the world’s jet fuel requirements. In IEA’s (2017c) bioenergy roadmap, biofuels start to notably penetrate the aviation sector by 2025, providing a quarter of demand in 2040, and provide over 40% of energy demand by 2050. Thus, the current assumptions for global renewable energy in transport by 2030 are that 4.5% of renewable energy in TFEC will come from liquid biofuels and 0.6% from renewable electricity (IRENA 2016). 11 Iceland consumed 480 TJ of additional biofuels in 2015 vs. 2014, whereas Switzerland consumed 1,124 TJ of additional biofuels over the same period. 12 For more information on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Renewable Fuel Standard program, visit https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/ overview-renewable-fuel-standard 75 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 BOX 4.3 • ARE ELECTRIC VEHICLES A SILVER BULLET FOR TRANSPORTATION? Renewables’ penetration into the transport sector has been slow to date, reaching just 3% in 2015, the lowest among all sectors. Most of the renewable consumption is concentrated in road transport and is almost exclusively from biofuels. However, the rapid rise of electric vehicles (EVs), a segment of vehicles comprising electric two- and three wheelers, cars, and buses, is providing a way for renewable electricity to contribute to road transport as well. In 2016, EVs accounted for an estimated 4% of renewable energy consumption on roads 20162 (IEA 2017a, figure 5.3.1). Most of this consumption was in China thanks to the substantial size of its fleet of electric two- and three wheelers coupled with the increasing share of renewables in its power mix (26% in 2016) (figure 5.3.2). The remaining global consumption of RE electricity in transport was much smaller in comparison and occurred mostly in Europe, Japan, and the United States. Europe had the highest share of renewable EV consumption. This is due to vehicle deployment in markets with high shares of renewable generation such as Norway, Europe’s largest electric car market where hydropower accounts for over 90% of total generation. Renewable electricity consumption in transport in Japan and the United States was mostly from electric cars. However, because renewables play a less prominent role in the electricity supply of both Japan and the United States (10% and 15% respectively in 2016), their contribution to the cars’ total electricity demand was relatively smaller than in China or Europe. FIGURE 4.3.1 • Renewable energy in road transport FIGURE 4.3.2 • Renewable energy consumption by EVs, 2016 Renewable consumption in road transport Renewable electricity consumption by EVs, 2016 40 TWh 40% 4% 7% 30 30% 20 20% 2016 2022 10 10% 0 0% China Europe United States Japan Biofuels EVs EV – 2/3 wheelers EV – buses EV – cars % RES-E consumed by EVs (right axis) Source: International Energy Agency, 2017a. Going forward, the continuing expansion of EVs in markets with rising shares of renewable generation is expected to help renewable electricity increase its contribution to road transport. By 2022, renewable electricity could account for 7% of the renewable road consumption, compared to just 4% today (see above). System integration policies will be key to maximize renewables’ contribution to fuel EVs as well as vice versa: to ensure that EVs contribute to the integration of renewables in a system friendly way. 1.This data is an estimation because real-world observed data regarding the primary energy source of electricity consumed at the point of final end user does not exist. The assumption used to account for this is based on the principle of allocating the final energy consumption of a secondary energy source (electricity) to it primary source (renewables) based on the shares in gross production. This convention is in line with the renewable energy statistical accounting frameworks established by the Sustainable Energy For All Global Tracking Framework (SE4ALL, 2013; SE4ALL, 2015) and the European Commission Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/ED (European Commission 2009). 2.The shares of biofuels and renewable electricity are based at the end-user consumption level and do not account for the efficiencies of each motor. EVs have two to three times higher fuel economy than internal combustion engines. 76 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy CONCLUSIONS In recent years, the world has made encouraging progress in deploying renewable energy, particularly renewable electricity, which has accounted for well over 50% of net global power capacity additions over the past five years. Yet more needs to do be done. Biomass for power, hydropower, geothermal, solar PV, and onshore wind technologies now can in many circumstances provide electricity that is competitively priced compared to fossil- based electricity generation. This development should help convince investors and utilities to expand their deployment of renewable energy generation. Still, analysis presented in this report suggests that, without significant additional effort, the world is unlikely to achieve the goal of substantially increasing the share of renewable energy in global TFEC by 2030 as foreseen under the UN SDG 7 commitment. The needed acceleration is technically and economically feasible but requires strong and concerted policy action. Institutional, financial, and policy measures for a sustainable energy transition need to be tailored to the different regional, national, and local contexts, so they can support socioeconomic objectives such as employment, welfare, social equity, and community cohesion. The Policy Brief #3, part of Policy Briefs in support of the first SDG7 Review at the UN High-Level Political Forum 2018, addresses priority actions that could help to achieve a substantial increase of the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix. Although the transformation of the electricity sector is already under way, the bulk of deployment is still concentrated in a relatively small number of countries. The potential is great elsewhere but more progress is needed, particularly in many developing countries, where perceived investment risks are a barrier. Public finance can catalyze private investments, but its role extends to such important tasks as direct financing, especially in the context of expanding access to modern energy services (SDG 7.1 target) in poor rural communities, as well as providing alternative sources of funding, such as social financing. It is important to highlight that investments are needed in both on-grid and off-grid solutions. Furthermore, national, regional, and global action plans need to strive toward more equitable access to energy and greater convergence of energy use between the rich and the poor. An emphasis on energy services for productive end uses helps achieve the transformative impacts of modern energy access on poverty alleviation and other SDGs. Efforts of a much greater magnitude are also required in end uses such as heating/cooling and transport. With proper policy support and guidance, the use of renewable energy technologies for these purposes can indeed be stepped up significantly. An emphasis on energy services for productive end uses helps achieve the transformative impacts of modern energy access on poverty alleviation and other SDGs (IRENA 2017b). In heating, district energy systems using biomass, geothermal, or solar thermal (often in combination with storage and excess heat use) are an option in many cities and can be pursued through public investment, changes in fiscal and financial policies (including carbon taxes, grants, and incentives), and policies such as heat zoning (IRENA 2017b). Grants and subsidies can also support the greater deployment of renewables for industrial heat applications. The deployment of solar thermal technologies and other renewable heat options for households can be facilitated though rebate programs with free or low-cost installations for low-income households, mandates and building codes, and financial incentives. 77 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 In the transport sector, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies is essential to incentivize greater use of biofuels and electric vehicles. The production, distribution, and use of biofuels can be encouraged through obligations/ mandates, tax incentives, and research and development and demonstration programs. Tax incentives and purchase subsidies can support the adoption of electric vehicles, especially if paired with investments to create a dense network of charging stations and parallel investments into the rapid increase in renewable energy penetration in the electricity sector. The energy transition also depends on a rebalancing of transportation modes, including a major expansion of urban public transit systems running on renewable energy. Such choices can be reinforced by land-use policies that favor dense, mixed-use development. Although advances in the power sector have been strong, progress has been uneven and further growth will require tailored efforts to address deployment barriers across different country contexts. In emerging renewable energy markets, access to affordable finance and predictable policy frameworks will play an important role in supporting the development of the sector. In this context, innovative public financing instruments and de-risking tools have a crucial role to play in catalyzing investments in technology innovation and deployment. In mature markets, where the share of variable renewables has reached significant levels, a focus on system integration and adaptation of market design and regulations becomes central for continuing growth of the sector and its transformation. Indeed, renewables also play a key role in expanding access to electricity in unconnected areas (linked to the SDG 7.1 target), requiring targeted efforts to support deployment. Renewable energy and energy efficiency need to be promoted and accelerated in tandem to ensure that the transition to sustainable energy is not undermined by uncontrolled growth in TFEC. Together, renewables and efficiency will need to account for the vast majority of the decarbonization required to stay within the Paris Agreement boundaries. Tapping into synergies between them, together with the increased electrification of end- use sectors, will also permit greater overall energy system flexibility. A final policy area concerns the socioeconomic dimension—the energy transition discourse has thus far been largely technology-oriented and disconnected from the socioeconomic aspects upon which it is built and upon which its long-term sustainability depends. To ensure that the energy transition accelerates in a just, timely, and equitable way, greater attention is needed to the transformative impacts on society, institutions, financing, ownership structures, and the wider economy. This requires not only aligning private and public-sector policies but also supporting effective participation by all stakeholders. The transformation must be aimed at enabling active social involvement in energy system planning and operation, creating new businesses and jobs, pursuing a just transition, and helping citizens and industries to flourish while respecting climate and sustainability constraints. 78 Chapter 4 – Renewable Energy METHODOLOGY Renewable Energy for Transport Recently policy makers have asked what impact electric vehicles (EVs) may have on the transportation sector and whether EVs could significantly improve the share of renewable energy in global transport. However, the answer is complex and a significant reason for this complexity is due to energy accounting practices. From an energy accounting perspective, EVs are treated similarly to any other electric appliance because they do not produce energy themselves, rather they consume and store energy provided from another electric source. As a result, the main effect of substituting internal combustion engine light duty vehicles for EVs would be a decline in TFEC in Transport and an increase in TFEC in electricity, though due to higher electric motor efficiencies, this will not be a “one for one” increase. In theory it is possible to allocate electricity to transport in statistics. However, country data must be reported accurately and as of today there is also no universally agreed methodology in energy statistics to compute the percentage of renewables in sectors. REFERENCES BERC (Building Energy Research Center of Tsinghua University). 2017. China Building Energy Use 2017. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press. IEA (International Energy Agency). 2017a. Renewables 2017: Analysis and Forecasts to 2022. Market Report Series. Paris: IEA. ———. 2017b. World Energy Balances 2017. Paris: IEA. ———. 2017c. Technology Roadmap: Delivering Sustainable Bioenergy. Paris: IEA. IRENA (International Renewable Energy Agency). 2015. Technology Brief: Renewable Energy Options for Shipping. Bonn: IRENA. ———. 2016. REmap: Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Future, 2016 Edition. Bonn: IRENA. ———. 2017a. Technology Brief: Biofuels for Aviation. Bonn: IRENA. ———. 2017b. REthinking Energy: Accelerating the Global Energy Transformation. Bonn: IRENA. ———. 2018a. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017. Bonn: IRENA. ———. 2018b. The Energy Transition: View to 2050. Bonn: IRENA. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2017. “Brazil Biofuels Annual 2017.” Global Agricultural Information Network Report BR17006, USDA, Washington, DC. Sustainable Mobility for All. Global mobility for all 2017, Washington, DC. 79 CHAPTER 5 – ENERGY EFFICIENCY Photo: Paulo Barros/Metro-DF MAIN MESSAGES • Global trend: During the period 2014-15, global primary energy intensity fell by 2.8%, reaching 5.3 megajoules (MJ) per 2011 purchasing power parity dollar (PPP $). This is the fastest decline since 2010, the start of the tracking period. Thus, the headline indicator for energy efficiency, which is the compound annual growth rate of primary energy intensity since 2010, improved from -2.0% (2010-14) to -2.2% (2010-15). • 2030 target: However, this rate is still short of the -2.6% target needed to meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7.3 target for energy efficiency. Historical trends show that a 2.6% annual improvement was achieved in only three individual years since 1990, making the goal challenging. Each year that the improvement rate is not met raises the effective target for the remaining years to 2030, and this now stands at -2.7%. • Regions and income groups: On a global level, GDP grew nearly twice as fast as primary energy supply1 in 2010–15, but results were mixed among regions and income groups. A lack of consistent progress was noticeable in the Western Asia and Northern Africa region and the Latin America and Caribbean region, with Western Asia and Northern Africa being the only region where GDP growth did not outpace energy supply. All income groups achieved faster GDP growth than energy supply, but progress continues to be slow in low-income countries, where energy intensity is higher than the global average. • Demand-side intensity: Globally, although the industry sector still consumes the most energy, it made the most progress toward improved efficiency, which was especially noticeable in the upper- and lower-middle-income groups. Among high-income countries, transport remains the highest energy-consuming sector. Recent innovations in digitalization and electric mobility represent a key opportunity for policy makers to drive reductions in transport energy intensity, especially for freight transport. Residential energy intensity increased in low- and middle-income countries since 2010. As housing demand and service levels grow with economic development in low- and lower-middle- income countries, energy efficiency in the residential sector is critical to avoid costly lock-ins of inefficient buildings and appliances. • Supply-side intensity: The average thermal efficiency of fossil fuel powered electricity generation continues to increase, reaching 39% in 2015. This increase is driven primarily by more efficient natural gas power plants. By contrast, the average efficiency of coal-fired plants remained relatively stagnant, suggesting limited uptake of supercritical technology. There was a similar lack of progress in the thermal efficiency of oil-fired power generation. Power transmission and distribution losses remained unchanged, and continue to show a strong correlation with income levels, highlighting the potential for improvement in developing countries. 81 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 • Largest energy suppliers: The performance of the world’s top twenty countries in terms of energy supply is critical to achieving the SDG 7.3 target. In 2015, these countries accounted for nearly 80% of total primary energy supply. Encouragingly, six of them, including two of the world’s top five (Japan and the United States), seem to have reached a peak in energy demand, and reduced their annual primary energy supply in 2010–15 while continuing to grow GDP. Eight of the largest countries also outperformed the world average in reducing their energy intensity during the tracking period, with China, Indonesia, Japan, and the United Kingdom exceeding 3% improvement. FIGURE 5.1 • Primary energy intensity in 2015 (MJ/2011 $US PPP) 100% of the global average and above From 75% up to 100% of the global average From 50% up to 75% of the global average Under 50% of the global average Top 20 Energy Supply Countries Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), World Development Indicators (WDI) and United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) data 82 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency THE STORY IN PICTURES GLOBAL TRENDS Global primary energy intensity is declining consistently, but at a variable and insufficient pace, making the SDG7 target challenging FIGURE 5.2 • Global primary energy intensity and its annualized change, 1990-2015 8.0 1% 7.8 7.5 0% [(MJ/2011 US$ PPP)] Annual Change (%) 7.0 -1% -2% 2030 Target (-2.6%) 6.6 6.5 -3% 6.0 -4% 5.9 5.7 5.5 -5% 5.4 5.3 5.0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data Due to underperformance in 2010-15, more rapid improvements beyond the original target will be required in the remaining years 2016-2030 FIGURE 5.3 • Compound annual growth rate of primary energy intensity by period, and target rate for 2015-30 (%) 0% -1.4% -1.6% -1% -2.0% -2.0% -2.4% -2.6% -2.8% -2% -3% Additional progress required due to lag since 2010: -0.14 -4% 1990-2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015-30 Base Period Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 83 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 The decrease in total primary energy intensity means that in 2015, each unit of energy produced nearly 1.5 times more gross domestic product (GDP) than in 1990 FIGURE 5.4 • Trends in underling components of primary energy intensity at a global level, 1990-2015 (Index, 1990=100) 250 GDP 200 Total Primary Energy Supply Primary Energy Intensity 150 100 50 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data Cumulative energy savings from intensity improvements since 2010 are large enough to meet India’s energy needs in 2015 FIGURE 5.5 • Final energy consumption with and without energy savings from intensity improvements 365 Energy consumption (EJ) 355 345 335 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Actual energy consumption Consumption without energy intensity savings Source: WHO Global Health Observatory; WDI data 84 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency REGIONS AND INCOME GROUPS All income groups are making progress in reducing energy intensity, particularly lower-middle income and upper-middle income countries FIGURE 5.6 • Primary energy intensity by income group, as an index (1990=100) for 1990-2015 and in absolute terms for 2015 120 14.0 12.9 110 12.0 Primary energy intensity (income group) in 2015 100 10.0 90 8.0 5.8 80 6.0 4.9 4.6 Global Average: 5.3 70 4.0 60 2.0 50 0.0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Low Income High Income Upper-middle Income Lower-middle Income Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data However, regional progress is uneven, with Western Asia and Northern Africa, in particular, barely having reduced primary energy intensity since 1990 FIGURE 5.7 • Primary energy intensity at a regional level, as an index (1990=100) for 1990-2015 and in absolute terms for 2015 120 8.0 7.5 110 7.0 Primary energy intensity 6.0 5.6 (regional level) in 2015 100 5.2 5.1 Global Average: 5.3 5.0 5.0 4.7 90 4.0 3.9 80 3.0 70 2.0 60 1.0 50 0.0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Eastern Asia and South-eastern Asia Australia and New Zealand Latin America and the Caribbean Central Asia and Southern Asia Sub-Saharan Africa Northern America and Europe Western Asia and Northern Africa Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 85 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 DEMAND-SIDE EFFICIENCY Energy intensity reductions were driven primarily by industry, which has the largest share in final energy consumption and the fastest rate of improvement among all end-use sectors FIGURE 5.8 • Breakdown of total final energy consumption by sector, 2015; and compound annual growth rate of energy intensity by sector, 2010-2015 Compound Annual Growth Rate (%, 2010-15) Agriculture Industry -2.7 Industry 3% 32% -2.2 Residential Services 9% -2.1 Services -1.4 Agriculture -1.2 Passenger transport -0.6 Freight Residential transport Transport 24% 32% -3.0% -2.5% -2.0% -1.5% -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data High income and upper-middle income countries account for more than three quarters of energy savings FIGURE 5.9 • Breakdown of total final energy consumption by income group, 2015; and compound annual growth rate of energy intensity by income group, 2010-2015 Upper Middle High Income 2.1% HIgh Income Income 41% 39% 2.5% Upper Middle Income 2.9% Lower MIddle Income 2.5% Low Income Lower Middle Low Income -3.0% -2.5% -2.0% -1.5% -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% Income 2% 19% Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 86 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency SUPPLY-SIDE EFFICIENCY Rising global thermal power generation efficiency reflects greater efficiency and adoption of natural gas power plants, but more widely used coal-fired plant has not raised its efficiency FIGURE 5.10 • Thermal efficiency of fossil fuel power generation by fuel, 1990-2015; and by top 10 thermal power producers, 2015 50% China United States India Japan Korea 40% Germany Islamic Rep. of Iran World Average (39%) South Africa Australia Turkey 30% World Average 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Thermal Power Generation Efficiency (%) Coal Natural Gas Oil Average of all fossil fuel power generation Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) Power transmission and distribution loss rates of income groups suggest a significant improvement potential as income levels rise, particularly in Brazil and India FIGURE 5.11 • Power transmission and distribution loss rates by income group, 2005-2015; and by top 10 power producers, 2015 Power transmission and distrbution loss rate (%) 20.0% People’s Republic 18.0% 17.0% of China 16.0% United States 14.0% 15.4% India Russian 12.0% Federation 10.0% 8.9% Japan 8.0% World Average (8.6%) 8.6% Germany 6.0% Canada 6.4% 4.0% France 2.0% Brazil 0.0% Korea 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% Power transmission and distrbution loss rate (%) in 2015 Low Income High Income Upper-middle Income Lower-middle Income World average Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) 87 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 COUNTRY TRENDS Eight of the world’s largest energy users reduced their energy intensity more rapidly than the world as a whole FIGURE 5.12 • Top 20 energy supply countries’ compound annual growth rate of energy intensity, 2010-2015, and primary energy intensity, 2015, with bubbles scaled to energy supply 9 South Africa 8 Primary Energy Intensity (MJ/2011 US$PPP, 2015) Iran Canada 7 China Republic of Korea 6 Saudia Arabia United States of America Nigeria Thailand World Average (5.3 MJ/2011 US$PPP) 5 Russian Federation India 4 France Brazil (-2.2%) Japan Mexico Indonesia Germany 3 United Kingdom Turkey Italy Global Average: High income 2 - Upper middle income Lower middle income 1 Low income 0 -5% -4% -3% -2% -1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% Compound Annual Growth Rate (%, 2010-15) Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 88 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency Despite strong progress in many large economies, a number of countries have seen their energy intensity systematically increase during the 2010-2015 period FIGURE 5.13 • Compound annual growth rate of primary energy intensity, 2010-15 Annual primary energy intensity growth rate above 0% Annual primary energy intensity growth rate between 0% and -2% Annual primary energy intensity Changes in primary energy intensity are influenced by multiple factors, including growth rate under -2% technology, policies and economy, as well as exogenous variables such as weather. Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) and World Development Indicators (WDI) data 89 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 POLICY IMPLICATIONS Energy efficiency is imperative to sustainable development – it can narrow energy access gaps, minimize growing energy demands, improve service levels, and lower costs for all sectors of the economy. The Sustainable Development Goal 7.3 target of doubling the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency by 2030 is tracked through improvements in energy intensity. Reducing energy supply relative to GDP growth decreases energy intensity and creates significant economic, environmental, and social benefits. Energy intensity is the direct inverse of energy productivity. A reduction in energy intensity is directly correlated with an increase in energy productivity, meaning that more economic output is achieved for every unit of energy consumed. As SDG 7 is currently under review by the United Nations (UN), Policy Brief #1 on ensuring universal access to electricity, and Policy Brief #4 on “Doubling the Global Rate of Improvement in Energy Efficiency” outline priority actions on energy efficiency. In 2015, the global economy continued its long-term trend of decreasing its primary energy intensity by achieving its highest rate of annual improvement since 1990. This was the first time since the start of the tracking period in 2010, that the SDG7 target rate of improvement (2.6%) was surpassed. Global energy demand decreased by 0.8% while GDP grew over 3%. Continuing this trend through 2030 will remain a challenge given the growing energy demands of many emerging economies. Policymakers can benefit from a wealth of proven policies and available technologies, prioritizing the most impactful sectors in their respective countries. The impacts of energy intensity improvements cannot be ignored. In terms of economic expenditures, energy intensity improvements between 2000-2015 have avoided over $4 trillion in global spending.1 The global economy produced an additional $40,000 (USD PPP 2011) per MJ of energy in 2015 compared to 2000. Energy intensity improvements have avoided a billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year since 2014.2 1 IEA World Energy Statistics and Balances 2017 (database) 2 IEA Energy Efficiency 2017, adapted from World Energy Statistics and Balances 2017 and CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion (databases) 90 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency REGIONAL AND INCOME GROUP VARIATIONS BOX 5.1 • TRACKING ENERGY EFFICIENCY Energy efficiency policy development requires a sound national energy balance, with detailed demand-side data, in order to understand the dynamics of energy-use across various sectors. Energy intensity (energy use per unit of activity) is a key metric used in efficiency analysis and policy development. However, in addition to improvements in energy efficiency, energy intensity is also influenced by other factors, including the electricity generation mix, structure of an economy, the exchange rate, the affordability of energy services, the size of a country, climate and behaviour. To generate a greater understanding of energy efficiency, data relating energy use to specific activities at a subsector level are required. Examples include lighting energy use per unit of floor area in buildings, or energy use per unit of production in an industry subsector. The availability of data necessary for a more detailed understanding of energy efficiency trends is variable across countries. Therefore, a critical need is to increase the quantity and quality of data necessary for analysis of energy efficiency trends in order to better understand the impact of policy measures and areas where further action is needed. Further information about the development of energy efficiency indicators has been published by the World Bank’s Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE)index,1 and the International Energy Agency (IEA)2 with training courses also available for policymakers and statisticians.3 1 https://rise.worldbank.org 2 https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/energy-efficiency-indicators-essentials-for-policy-making.html 3 https://edx.iea.org/ Since the start of the tracking period in 2010, energy intensity improved each year in all regions other than the Western Asia and Northern Africa region, where a yearly regression occurred on two separate occasions. The GDP growth of most countries in this region is tied heavily to energy intensive oil and gas extraction. The sharp decline in oil and gas prices throughout most of the tracking period partly explains the modest pace of GDP growth relative to energy supply. Despite large increases in energy demand, emerging economies in the Asia and the Pacific and the Africa regions have now surpassed the global rate of improvement in energy intensity, but intensity levels continue to be higher than the world average. High income countries throughout Europe and the Americas are also showing consistent decline in energy intensity during the tracking period, but at a slower rate than low and middle income countries. The performance of the world’s 20 largest energy supply countries is critical to achieving the SDG7 target. In 2015, these countries accounted for nearly 80% of total primary energy supply worldwide. The pace of energy intensity improvement in eight of the world's twenty largest energy supply countries (referred to as the Top 20) surpassed the world average of 2.2% during the 2010-2015 tracking period. China, the world’s largest energy consumer, led the way with an energy intensity improvement rate of over 4%. Brazil and Iran were the only two top 20 countries that did not improve energy intensity since 2010. According to the World Bank's Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) index, top 20 countries score significantly higher than the world average on energy efficiency policies and regulations, which may provide a possible explanation for performance on reducing energy intensity. 91 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 BOX 5.2 • INNOVATIVE TRENDS: DIGITALIZATION CAN IMPROVE ACCESS TO ENERGY SERVICES AND ENABLE SYSTEMS EFFICIENCY Improvements in data collection, analytics and connectivity, which form the fundamental elements of digitalization, are set to have a big impact on energy systems across the buildings, industry and transport sectors. There is however high uncertainty on the potential impacts of digitalization given the speed of technology developments and the extent to which barriers are overcome. FIGURE 5.15. • Digitalization’s potential impact on transport, buildings, and industry Autonomous cars/trucks Magnitude of ootential change to energy demand High Mobility as a service Smart thermostats User programming Occupancy Additive manufacturing sensors Beyond the plant fence Optimised process control Accelerating innovation in industry Daylighting sensors Low Industrial automation Unmanned shipping Big data in aviation Remote control Drone delivery Low High Barriers to digitalization Transport Buildings Industry Source: IEA (2017), Digitalization and Energy, IEA/OECD, Paris, www.iea.org/digital In industry, digital metering, monitoring and process controls are already helping many businesses identify and implement efficiency improvements. Advances in digital technologies such as 3D printing and greater connectivity across supply chains and markets offer further opportunities for efficiency gains. In the transport sector, vehicle automation and shared mobility services could revolutionise how people and goods are moved, but the energy implications are unclear, with energy consumption having the potential to increase or decrease substantially, depending on the how these technologies are used. In buildings, digitalization is bringing new energy services to consumers, such as smart thermostats, occupancy sensors, remote control and enhanced safety features. IEA modelling estimates that these advances have the potential to cut global buildings energy use by 10% by 2040. However, digitalization also comes with an energy cost, in particular the greater use of standby power by connected devices, which could offset much of the potential savings. Source: IEA (2017), Digitalization and Energy, IEA/OECD, Paris, www.iea.org/digital 92 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency An important emerging trend to note is that some developed countries seem to have reached a peak in total primary energy supply, and have even experienced reductions on a yearly basis. Traditionally, reductions in energy supply have occurred only in conjunction with lower output in large economies, for example during economic recessions. Thanks in part to energy efficiency improvements, six of the top 20 energy supply countries – France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US – managed to reduce annual energy supply and still continue to grow GDP steadily. It should be noted that all six are high income countries that are not experiencing the same kind of rapid economic growth as emerging economies in the top 20 group such as China, India, Indonesia, and South Africa. Evidently, reducing energy supply should not be the prescribed universal goal to meet the SDG7 target. Rather, improving energy intensity will enable countries to increase the productivity of each unit of energy used. DEMAND-SIDE EFFICIENCY Analyzing the industry, transport and residential sectors is key to evaluate demand-side efficiency since these sectors account for the majority of the world’s total final energy consumption. While the industry sector continues to consume the most energy, it has also made the most progress towards improved efficiency. Industrial energy intensity improved by 2.7% per year during the 2010-2015 tracking period, accounting for the largest share of energy savings during that period. Upper middle income and high income countries accounted for 39% and 41% of global energy savings respectively, a combined share of 80%. Amongst individual countries, China had the largest contribution, accounting for more than a third (35%) of global energy savings. The United States accounted for 13%, India for 8%, Japan, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland accounted for 3% each. Savings in the industry sector accounted for the largest contribution in all of these countries. In addition to China and India, other emerging economies such as Malaysia, and Vietnam were also among the world’s top 10 highest savings in industrial energy consumption. Efficiency improvements in industry can be attributed to key policy actions and the addition of new and more efficient production technologies in energy-intensive industry processes. Of particular relevance is China’s Top 10,000 Energy-Consuming Enterprises Program, which covers two-thirds of the country’s energy consumption, and focuses primarily on the industrial sector. It imposes a mandatory absolute energy-saving target of 250 million tonnes of coal equivalent (approximately 7,327 TJ) by 2015, as part of China’s 12th Five-Year Plan. Globally, transport has also improved its energy intensity, but at a slower pace for both passengers and freight. Passenger transport improved its energy intensity by 1.2% per annum in 2010-2015, less than the 1.9% improvement in 2000-2010, while freight transport improved by 0.5% per annum in 2010-2015, less than the 0.8% improvement in 2000-2010. High income and upper middle income countries need to prioritize the transport sector given their growing transport demands, particulary for freight transport. These two income groups are responsible for 90% of transport energy consumption since 2010. Increased freight transport in these advanced economies is an important factor. Although freight transport accounts for 43% of global energy consumption in the transport sector, its share of global emissions from the transport sector is more than 50% and growing (see Box 5.3). This is particularly worrying, considering that only 16% of energy consumption by trucks is covered by fuel economy standards worldwide. 93 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 BOX 5.3 • THE SUSTAINABILITY OF ROAD FREIGHT TRANSPORT REQUIRES URGENT POLICY ACTION In 2015, road freight oil demand grew to 17 million barrels per day – a 50% increase since 2000. Over the period between 2010 and 2015, CO2 emissions from road freight transport increased by 17%, driven by strong growth in China and India, and the continued expansion of the heavy-duty vehicle fleet. The amount of goods transported by heavy-duty vehicles increased by 65% and truck sales grew by 60%. FIGURE 5.16 • Global road freight transport CO2 emissions Gt CO2 3.0 Rest of the World Mexico 2.5 Russian Federation 2.0 ASEAN Heavy trucks Africa 1.5 Medium trucks China Light commercial 1.0 India European Union 0.5 United States 0.0 2010 2015 2010 2015 Country/region Vehicle type Source: IEA (2017), The Future of Trucks – Implications for Energy and the Environment, IEA/OECD, Paris, https://www.iea.org/publications/ freepublications/publication/the-future-of-trucks---implications-for-energy-and-the-environment.html Despite the large and growing impact of road freight transport, regulatory policy has only recently begun to catch up. While more than 55% of energy consumption by cars was covered by fuel economy standards in 2016, only 16% of consumption by trucks was covered, with standards limited to Canada, China, Japan and the United States, and under development in the European Union, India, Korea, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia. Other policy approaches are available and are having significant impacts in some jurisdictions. Non-regulatory measures such as road tolls, scrappage programmes and voluntary green freight programmes are in place in many markets. Various member states of the European Union have experimented with these types of measures as well as having the highest fuel taxes in the world. In 2016, trucks in Europe were 14% more efficient per tonne-kilometre than those of the United States and 22% more efficient than those in China. Sources: IEA (2017), The Future of Trucks – Implications for Energy and the Environment, IEA/OECD, Paris, https://www.iea.org/publications/ freepublications/publication/the-future-of-trucks---implications-for-energy-and-the-environment.html IEA (2017), Energy Efficiency 2017, IEA/OECD, Paris, http://www.iea.org/efficiency/ Low and lower middle income economies also showed improvements in industrial and transport energy intensity since 2010, but the residential sector should remain the most pressing priority for the lower income groups. Residential energy intensity increased by 2.4% per annum and 1.8% per annum for low income and lower middle income countries, respectively, in 2010-2015. An increase in housing energy demand due to economic development makes the residential sector the highest energy consuming sector among these countries. Households often cannot afford newer, more efficient appliances and heating/cooling systems, which coupled with poor building design and lack of sufficient insulation, result in poor service levels and high cost for energy. Innovations in the lighting sector that produced affordable, energy efficient lighting products are applicable to all income groups. Similar technology innovations for key household appliances and cooling equipment would address the growing residential energy demands in lower income countries. (see Box 4.4) 94 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency BOX 5.4 • BUILDING ENERGY USE IN THE 21ST CENTURY: SPACE HEATING IS THE LARGEST BUILDING END-USE BUT SPACE COOLING IS GROWING THE FASTEST Final energy consumption in buildings continues to grow, with all buildings end-uses increasing since 2000. Space heating, cooking and water heating are the largest buildings end-uses, however they have risen relatively slowly, with less than 25% growth since 2000. Space cooling, lighting and appliances grew the fastest, with each increasing by more than 45% since 2000. FIGURE 5.17 • Trends in global buildings final energy by end-use Global buildings final energy consumption (EJ) Growth in global buildings final energy since 2000 50 70 60 40 50 30 40 20 30 20 10 10 0 0 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Space heating Space cooling Water heating Lighting Cooking Appliances and other Source: IEA (2017), Energy Efficiency 2017, IEA/OECD, Paris, http://www.iea.org/efficiency/ Cooling appears to have peaked in the Global North (cold and temperate countries) in 2010 with a slight decrease in space cooling energy consumption, largely driven by efficiency gains in Japan and the United States. However, globally, cooling continues to be the fastest growing building end-use, owing to growth in the Global South (mostly hot countries), where residential buildings have seen more than 300% growth, driven by increased wealth and comfort demands for cooling. Residential buildings in the Global South also have the largest growth in appliances energy demand with nearly 170% growth since 2000. Lighting energy consumption growth is largest in non-residential buildings, growing by two-thirds since 2000. Lighting appears to have hit a global tipping point in 2015, with higher efficiency lighting enabling growing energy service demand to be met by flat or even decreasing energy consumption for the first time. Source: IEA (2017), Energy Efficiency 2017, IEA/OECD, Paris, http://www.iea.org/efficiency/ 95 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 SUPPLY-SIDE EFFICIENCY Although the growth of clean renewable power generation has been significant in recent years, thermal power generation with fossil fuels still maintains a majority share in the electricity sector throughout the world. Natural gas is the only source that improved thermal power efficiency considerably since 2010, while coal and oil power efficiency remain stagnant. On a global level, despite the improvement of natural gas efficiency to surpass 45% as of 2015, thermal power efficiency remains below 39% on average worldwide. Coal still accounts for the vast majority of thermal power generation in many large energy consumers such as China, India, Korea, Germany, South Africa and Australia. Among the top 20 countries, half of them had thermal power efficiencies below the world average of 39% in 2015. Thermal efficiency trends clearly dictate that natural gas-powered options should be prioritized over coal-powered or oil-powered options as a long-term investment when thermal generation is necessary. Losses in natural gas transmission and distribution have maintained a consistent declining trend since 1990. From 2012-2015, however, losses increased slightly. This reversal seems to be caused by loss increases in Malaysia, Pakistan and the Russian Federation, which together account for nearly two-thirds of global losses during this period. In 2015, average global electricity transmission and distribution (T&D) losses stayed relatively constant at 8.6%. This amounted to nearly 2,000 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity, equivalent to the entire electricity consumption of India and Japan combined. Although this remains a large amount, it is encouraging not to see any increase in T&D losses given the large amount of renewable energy generation capacity additions during the tracking period, which can put heavy strains on grid operations. The quality of grid infrastructure needs to keep up with the complex demands of new capacity additions. It is not surprising that loss rates remain correlated to income levels. Losses in high income countries have been consistently below the world average and have exhibited an overall downward trend, while those of upper middle income countries have been rapidly declining towards the world average. Lower middle income countries improved the most, reducing losses to 17% in 2015 from above 20% before 2005. Low income countries were the only group that showed an upward trend in T&D loss rate, jumping to 15.4% in 2015 from below 14% before 2005. As low income countries add generation capacity to meet growing energy demands, grid infrastructure needs to be upgraded concurrently to avoid further increases in losses. CONCLUSIONS Sustainable Development Goal 7.3 is crucial to the sustainable energy agenda. Energy efficiency will continue to address critical issues in the production, delivery, and consumption of energy for all income levels and geographical constraints. Tracking energy intensity toward the SDG7 target has revealed important priorities for policymakers to focus on. Transport energy intensity needs to improve, especially in high income and upper middle income countries. The residential sector is regressing in energy efficiency, particularly in developing countries with growing heating and cooling needs. On the supply side, the transition to more efficient and clean energy sources, such as renewables and natural gas, is not scaling up fast enough to keep up with 2030 target projections 96 Chapter 5 –Energy Efficiency REFERENCES IEA (International Energy Agency). 2017a. Digitalization and Energy 2017. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and IEA. ———. 2017b. The Future of Trucks: Implications for Energy and the Environment, Second Edition. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and IEA. ———. 2017c. Energy Technology Perspectives 2017: Catalysing Energy Technology Transformations. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and IEA. World Bank. 2016. Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) 2016. World Bank Group. 97 CHAPTER 6 – GLOBAL PROSPECTS FOR SDG 7 Photo: Supriya Biswas /Irena MAIN MESSAGES • The world fails to achieve all Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7 targets under current levels of ambition. The New Policies Scenario of the International Energy Agency (IEA) shows that current and planned policies fall short of delivering universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all by 2030. This means that in 2030 nearly 675 million people are projected to be without access to electricity, 2.3 billion people will not have clean cooking facilities, global energy-related CO2 emissions will continue to rise, and millions of premature deaths will still be caused by harmful indoor and outdoor local air pollution each year. • The outlook for electricity access: Despite progress in all world regions, the world is not on track to achieve universal electricity access by 2030, with Sub-Saharan Africa at great risk of being left behind. The country-by-country analysis of policies, investment, and technologies that underpins the New Policies Scenario shows a projected electrification rate of 92% globally by 2030. Most countries in Asia are on track to deliver near-universal access by 2030, meaning that 90% of the population without access to electricity at that time is projected to live in Sub-Saharan Africa. • The outlook for access to clean cooking: The world is far from being on track to achieve universal access to clean cooking facilities. Of the global population, 27%—or 2.3 billion people—are projected to remain without access to clean-cooking facilities in 2030. Even though near-universal access to electricity is achieved in Asia, 1.3 billion people are still projected to be without clean cooking access by 2030. Despite this slowly falling number, strong population growth hides some success: 900 million people are expected to gain clean cooking access over the period. • The outlook for renewable energy: By 2030, the share of renewables is expected to grow to 21% of total final energy consumption (TFEC) under current and planned policies, from 17.5% today. Traditional uses of biomass are projected to remain a large component of renewable energy consumption; however, its share of total renewable consumption falls from 45% in 2015 to 25% in 2030. Therefore, the share of modern renewables grows at a faster relative pace than total renewables, from 10% in 2015 to 15% in 2030. Although renewable power generation is progressing rapidly, supportive policies for renewable transport and heat remain limited, preventing greater overall renewables penetration. • The outlook for energy efficiency: Energy efficiency policies are expected to contribute to further reductions in global energy intensity, but at a rate not fast enough to bring the world on a sustainable pathway or to reach the SDG 7.3 target. Global energy intensity is expected to decrease by 2.4% per year on average between 2015 and 2030 in the New Policies Scenario, faster than the 2.2% improvement seen over 2010–15 but still short of the 2.6% annual improvement required to meet the SDG 7.3 target. • Achieving a sustainable energy future: The IEA’s Sustainable Development Scenario, released in 2017, describes an integrated pathway for the world’s energy system to deliver on energy-related SDGs: to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy services by 2030 99 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 (SDG 7); to substantially reduce the air pollution which causes deaths and illness (SDG target 3.9); and to take effective action to combat climate change (SDG 13). A central finding is that universal access to modern energy can be delivered without putting the climate objective at risk, bringing substantial co-benefits. Renewables and efficiency are the key mechanisms to drive forward the low-carbon transition and reduce pollutant emissions.   This chapter describes the results of global modeling exercises to understand whether current policy ambitions are sufficient for meeting the targets of SDG 7, and what additional actions are needed for success. The main two scenarios described are derived from the World Energy Outlook, IEA’s flagship publication. The New Policies Scenario—the central scenario—takes into account the policies and implementing measures affecting energy markets that had been adopted as of mid-2017, with relevant policy proposals, even though specific measures to put them into effect may yet to be fully developed. Because of the many institutional, political, and economic obstacles involved, and in some cases the lack of detail in announced intentions on how current commitments and plans will be implemented, this scenario assumes only cautious implementation. It includes, for example, the greenhouse gas and energy–related components of the Nationally Determined contributions pledged under the Paris Agreement (COP21). The Sustainable Development Scenario (introduced in 2017; see box 6.1) lays out an integrated least-cost strategy for the achievement of three interlinked and important policy objectives related to access to energy services (SDG 7), reducing air pollution (SDG target 3.9), and combatting climate change (SDG 13). The Energy for All case is separate from the Sustainable Development Scenario and describes a pathway for delivering only on the target of SDG 7.1, universal access to modern energy. ELECTRICITY ACCESS Despite progress in all world regions, the world is not on track to achieve universal electricity access by 2030, and Sub-Saharan Africa is at great risk of being left behind. The country-by-country analysis of policies, investment, and technologies that underpins IEA’s New Policies Scenario shows a projected electrification rate of 92% globally by 2030, leaving about 675 million people without access by that date. Despite this failure to achieve the indicator of SDG 7.1.1, many countries are on track to achieve universal electricity access, and over 600 million people will gain access over the period. Sustained progress and policy commitments in Asia mean that the region is projected to reach a 99% rate of electrification in 2030. This achievement is largely the result of India’s tremendous electrification effort, which sees 250 million people gaining electricity access between now and the early 2020s, when the country reaches full access. In Latin America, nearly three-quarters of countries are on track to attain universal access by 2020, and by 2030 the region achieves near universal access, with Haiti the only country with an access rate below 90%. The access deficit continues to become more concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa. Despite a projected 15 percentage point increase in the access rate, bringing the access rate to almost 60% of the population, 600 million people still are projected to remain without access in 2030, as progress struggles to keep pace with population growth in many countries: Recent progress in Sub-Saharan Africa has been unevenly distributed, and in these projections, population growth overtakes progress—which is saturated by 2030. 100 Chapter 6 – Global Prospects for SDG 7 FIGURE 6.1 • Electricity access rate and population without electricity by region in the New Policies Scenario Electrification Rate People without access 100% 1,200 1,000 80% Millions People 800 60% 600 40% 400 20% 200 Historical Projections 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2016 2030 Sub-Saharan Africa India Indonesia Other Southeast Asia Other developing Asia Other Source: IEA 2017a; www.iea.org/sdg Note: The geographical groupings presented here are derived from the World Energy Outlook and are described in Annex 1 of the World Energy Model documentation: https://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/2017/WEM_Documentation_WEO2017.pdf. They do not necessarily correspond to regional groupings used in other chapters of this report. Analysis of energy balances and resources, population distribution, and infrastructure shows that energy and technology sources are changing rapidly, and are set to be transformative in the future. Since 2000, fossil fuels have been the source of 70% of new electricity access, and the centralized grid is the source for 99% of connections. In the New Policies Scenario, more than 60% of those who gain access by 2030 are projected to do so through generation from renewables, mostly solar and hydro. Grid extensions serve half of the newly connected, but in rural areas decentralized power systems are the most cost-effective solutions for more than two-thirds of those who gain access. In the Energy for All Case, where universal access to electricity is achieved by 2030, the greatest challenge is to provide access to people living in the most remote areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. Geospatial analysis shows that decentralized systems are the least-cost option to supply electricity for nearly three-quarters of those concerned, but that grid expansion also has an important part to play. The analysis also shows that almost 90% of those gaining access over and above the projections in the New Policies Scenario do so through generation from renewables. The additional annual investment cost is $28 billion per year to 2030, equivalent to 1.7% of total global energy investment. Overcoming this challenge requires better policies: these include setting up dedicated institutions with the responsibility for electricity access, a focus on electrifying productive uses and public services, ensuring an enabling environment to allow the private sector to flourish, and allowing decentralized solutions to play a role. 101 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ACCESS TO CLEAN COOKING The world is far from being on track to achieve universal access to clean cooking facilities. In 2030, 2.3 billion people—or 27% of the global population—are projected to remain without access to clean cooking facilities. Despite this slowly falling number, strong population growth hides some success: 900 million people are expected to gain access by 2030. Unlike the case for electricity access, the clean cooking access deficit remains geographically dispersed. Although most countries in Asia are on track to achieve universal electricity access by 2030, over 1.3 billion people—31% of the population—will remain reliant on basic biomass cooking facilities, as well as coal and kerosene at that time. This represents some progress, although far from enough to achieve the target. Significant reductions in the population without access to clean fuels and stoves for cooking come from countries with dedicated policy initiatives—in particular China, India, and Indonesia—and from a switch in urban areas to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). In Sub-Saharan Africa, about 320 million people gain access to clean cooking facilities during the period to 2030, an estimated 100 million of them as a result of the intentions related to clean cooking pledges in countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions. However, the population of Sub-Saharan Africa grows by 450 million people by 2030, and clean cooking efforts do not keep pace. Therefore, the number of people cooking with traditional uses of biomass is projected to increase to 820 million people by 2030, increasing demand. FIGURE 6.2 • Clean cooking access rate and population without electricity by region in the New Policies Scenario Clean cooking access rate Population without access 100% 3,000 Historical Projections 2,500 80% Million people 2,000 60% 1,500 40% 1,000 20% 500 2000 2010 2020 2030 2015 2030 Sub-Saharan Africa India Indonesia Other Southeast Asia Other developing Asia China Source: IEA 2017a, based on WHO Household Energy Survey Database and IEA Energy Balances; www.iea.org/sdg. Note: The geographical groupings presented here are derived from the World Energy Outlook and are described in Annex 1 of the World Energy Model documentation: https://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/2017/WEM_Documentation_WEO2017.pdf. They do not necessarily correspond to regional groupings used in other chapters of this report. The IEA’s Energy for All case describes what would be needed to deliver universal clean cooking to those 2.3 billion people who would be left without access under current trends (1.3 billion in Asia and over 900 million in Sub-Saharan Africa). This requires a major shift in the cooking fuel mix, with LPG the main source of access in urban areas and a mix of technologies, depending on geography and resources, in rural areas. Improved biomass cookstoves are likely to play an important role: although this solution is relatively low cost, there are significant challenges in scaling up their use and in ensuring that they perform to higher emissions standards. 102 Chapter 6 – Global Prospects for SDG 7 The costs associated with delivering universal clean cooking access, $3 billion per year, are about one-tenth of those associated with delivering universal access to electricity, and the benefits are very significant. An estimated 1.8 million premature deaths related to household air pollution are avoided in 2030 by providing access to clean cooking for all, even though the effects of pollution in earlier years mean there are still about 700,000 premature deaths in 2030. Analysis also shows significant time savings: over 100 billion hours each year are currently spent gathering wood for fuel, mostly by women, and this time could be used for more productive purposes. Importantly, the SDG 7.1 target can be met without additional net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The small rise in CO2 emissions arising from additional fossil fuel demand (0.2%) is more than offset by the net reduction in GHG emissions from reducing dependence on traditional uses of biomass for cooking, which largely result in methane. The actions policy makers need to take in order to achieve this target, outlined in Policy Brief #2, include translating commitments into concrete, implementable, and evidence-based domestic policies; improving coordination between the energy, education, development, and health sectors; and prioritizing better monitoring of household fuel use to measure the impact of interventions. BOX 6.1 • A PATH FOR THE ENERGY SECTOR TO ACHIEVE ENERGY-RELATED SDG’S: THE IEA’S SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO The World Energy Outlook 2017 introduced a new forward-looking, normative scenario—the Sustainable Development Scenario—that provides an energy sector pathway combining the fundamentals of sectoral energy policy with three closely associated but distinct policy objectives related to the SDGs: (1) to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy services by 2030 (SDG 7); (2) to substantially reduce the air pollution that causes deaths and illness (SDG target 3.9); and (3) to take effective action to combat climate change (SDG 13). The objective is to lay out an integrated least-cost strategy for the achievement of these important policy objectives, alongside energy security, in order to show how the respective objectives can be reconciled, dealing with potentially conflicting priorities, so as to realize mutually supportive benefits. The new scenario provides a benchmark for measuring progress toward a more sustainable energy future, in contrast with the New Policies Scenario, which tracks current and planned policies. FIGURE B6.1.1 • The Sustainable Development Scenario integrates main energy-related SDG targets Energ Achieve Address rio y climate na universal Address Achieve energy universal fo e change climate 450 Sc access energy r Al change Sustainable access l Case Development Scenario le ar io an C A ir S c e n Improve Improve air quality air quality Source: IEA 2017b. 103 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 In the Sustainable Development Scenario, low-carbon sources double their share in the energy mix to 40% in 2040, all avenues to improve efficiency are pursued, coal demand goes into an immediate decline, and oil consumption peaks soon thereafter. Power generation is all but decarbonized, relying by 2040 on generation from renewables (over 60%) and nuclear power (15%) as well as a contribution from carbon capture and storage (6%)—a technology that plays an even more significant role in cutting emissions from the industry sector. Electric cars move into the mainstream quickly, but decarbonizing the transport sector also requires much more stringent efficiency measures across the board, notably for road freight. Renewables and efficiency are the key mechanisms to drive forward the low-carbon transition and reduce pollutant emissions. Considering the interlinkages between them and aligning policy and market frameworks—notably in the residential sector—is essential to ensure cost-efficient outcomes. The provision of highly efficient appliances, combined with decentralized renewables, also plays a major role in extending full access to electricity and clean cooking, especially in rural communities and isolated settlements that are hard to reach with the grid. Looking to 2030, modern renewables reach 21% of TFEC, more than doubling today’s share; and achieving the goal of universal access to clean cooking facilities reduces significantly traditional uses of biomass from the energy mix. SDG target 7.3 is exceeded in the Sustainable Development Scenario, with average annual improvements in global energy intensity need accelerating to 3.4% annually to achieve critical energy sector objectives RENEWABLE ENERGY By 2030, the share of renewables is expected to grow to 21% of TFEC under current and planned policies, from 17.5% today. Traditional uses of biomass are projected to remain a large component of renewable energy consumption; however their share of total renewable consumption falls from 45% in 2015 to 25% in 2030. Therefore, the share of modern renewables grows at a faster relative pace than total renewables, increasing significantly from 8.6% in 2010 to 15% in 2030. Modern renewable energy sources are anticipated to supply 35% of the incremental total final energy demand to 2030, more than any other fuel, backed by strong policy commitments and falling costs. Electricity generation from renewables is expected to overtake that from coal in the 2020s to supply 34% of electricity by 2030, from 23% in 2015. Power generation from wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) are the fastest-growing sources of renewable generation and are anticipated to contribute 35% and 26%, respectively, of the absolute increase in renewable electricity to 2030. Hydropower is projected still to account for nearly half of all renewable power generation in 2030. Growth in renewables is not confined to the power sector. The direct use of renewables for heat and transport is also set to increase on the basis of current and planned policies, but at a much more limited pace: supportive policies are often fewer, costs sometimes higher, and adoption generally slower. In the New Policies Scenario, the share of renewables in transport grows to 5% in 2030 from 3% in 2015, and direct renewables used in buildings grows to 7% in 2030 from 5% in 2015 (excluding the traditional uses of biomass for cooking). In IEA’s central outlook, renewables contribute an increasing share of total primary energy demand in all regions, and grow in almost all sectors. China continues to be the leading country in renewable energy use and increases its share of global modern renewable energy supply from 15% in 2015 to nearly 20% in 2030. China is followed by the United States, the European Union, and India in renewable energy use in this outlook. 104 Chapter 6 – Global Prospects for SDG 7 FIGURE 6.3 • Share of modern renewables in TFEC in the New Policies Scenario 0.4 Central and South America Europe North America 0.3 Asia-Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa Eurasia Middle East 0.2 0.1 - 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Source: IEA 2017a, based on WHO Household Energy Survey Database and IEA Energy Balances; www.iea.org/sdg. Note: The geographical groupings presented here are derived from the World Energy Outlook and are described in Annex 1 of the World Energy Model documentation: https://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/2017/WEM_Documentation_WEO2017.pdf. They do not necessarily correspond to regional groupings used in other chapters of this report. While there are many positive developments for renewables, especially for power generation, this progress is not sufficient to put the world on a sustainable track. The IEA’s Sustainable Development Scenario shows a pathway for the global energy system to deliver on the main energy-related SDGs (See Box 1). In this scenario, modern renewables reach 21% of TFEC by 2030 and are especially instrumental in delivering universal electricity access, especially to rural access, to reduce air pollution and to bring about an early peak in CO2 emissions. BOX 6.2 • THE POTENTIAL OF RENEWABLE ENERGY TO 2050: A VIEW FROM IRENA’S REMAP ANALYSIS The global imperative to achieve sustainable growth and limit climate change, combined with a rapid decline in costs and rising investment into renewable energy, has put in motion a transition of the way that energy is produced, distributed, and consumed. This Energy Transition will transform the energy system, from one largely based on fossil fuels to one based largely on renewable energy sources. When combined with significant improvements in energy efficiency, the new system will accelerate the decoupling of economic growth and energy demand. We have now a good understanding that the accelerated deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency measures are the key elements of the Energy Transition. According to the REmap analysis of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the accelerated deployment of renewables and energy efficiency can achieve over 90% of the emissions reductions needed by 2050 to reach the below 2°C mark with 66% probability. Energy demand in 2050 would remain around today’s level thanks to intensive energy efficiency improvements, despite significant population and economic growth. The share of renewable energy would meanwhile rise from about 15% of the primary energy supply in 2015 to about 66% by 2050. Improvements in the energy intensity of the global economy would be achieved by a mix of measures. The most important ones would be energy efficiency measures in heating and fuel use, followed by energy efficiency measures in power generation and electrification of transport. Interestingly, some of the incremental energy intensity improvements could be attributed to renewable energy, highlighting the important synergies between energy efficiency and renewable energy. This includes efficiency gains from renewable energy–based heating, cooling, transport, and electrification coupled with renewable power. 105 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 The energy supply mix would change substantially. Under IRENA’s REmap analysis, total global primary energy supply in 2050 would be below 500 exajoules (EJ) per year in 2050, slightly below today’s level and 30% less than a scenario with continued use of current and planned policies in business as usual (reference case). The share of renewable energy in the total primary energy supply grows to about 66% by 2050. Total fossil fuel use in 2050 would be a third of today’s level, with the use of coal declining the most and natural gas becoming the most important fossil fuel. The world would not run out of fossil fuels, but it would stop using the most challenging resources that have high production costs. The power sector is currently on track to achieve the necessary emissions reductions. The world has witnessed accelerated deployment of solar and wind power on a global scale in recent years, based on technology innovations and dramatic cost reductions. But these ongoing efforts must continue, and more focus should be placed on power systems flexibility as the share of variable renewable power rises. Worldwide, electricity generation would increase to about 47,000 terawatt-hours (TWh) per year by 2050. Total electricity generation capacity would reach more than 18,000 gigawatts (GW) in the same year. Renewable energy technologies would generate an increasing share of that electricity. The renewable share would rise from an estimated 25% of total electricity generation in 2017 to 85% by 2050. In IRENA’s REmap analysis, the share of electricity in TFEC would need to increase to 40% by 2050. Electricity accounts for only about 20% of final energy use today. This would require a broader coupling between the power sector and end-use sectors such as transport, buildings, and industry. In transport, the number of electric vehicles would need to grow. It is critical that new buildings be of the highest efficiency and that existing ones be retrofitted and refurbished at an accelerating rate. Buildings and city designs should facilitate renewable electricity integration. Governments will have an important role in facilitation of enabling infrastructure such as recharging stations and smart grids. As regards TFEC in end-use sectors (buildings, transport, and industry), under IRENA’s REmap analysis, demand would remain flat compared to today’s level, at about 340 EJ per year (but almost a third less than the reference case). Direct uses of renewable energy would grow from 10% to 50%. Notably, the share of final bioenergy use in TFEC would rise; at the same time, the use of traditional bioenergy would drop to almost zero and be partly replaced by modern bioenergy and electrification. Solar water heater use would see 10-fold growth for industry and buildings. Growth would also be observed in direct uses of geothermal heating. The oil share would decrease significantly, with transport relying more on biofuels and electricity. Such an energy transition is affordable but will require additional investments in low-carbon technologies compared to the reference case. Further significant cost reductions will be major drivers for increased investments across the range of renewables and enabling technologies, but cumulative investment in all energy supply would need to increase from 93 trillion to 120 trillion over the 2015–50 timeframe. From a macroeconomic perspective, the energy transition can fuel economic growth, create new employment opportunities and enhance human health and welfare. Gross domestic product (GDP) would be boosted about 1% in 2050 compared to the reference case. Important structural economic changes would take place. Whereas fossil fuel industries would incur the largest reductions in sectoral output, those related to capital goods, services, and bioenergy would experience the highest increases. The energy sector (including energy efficiency) would create millions of additional jobs in 2050 compared to the reference case. Job losses in fossil fuels would be completely offset by new jobs in renewables, with more jobs being created by energy efficiency activities. The overall GDP improvement would induce further job creation in other economic sectors. Improvements in human welfare, including economic, social, and environmental aspects, would generate benefits far beyond those captured by GDP. Savings from reduces externalities related to damages to human health and the environment would outweigh additional costs by as much as five times. However, today’s markets are distorted: fossil fuel consumption is still subsidized in many countries and the true cost of burning fossil fuels, in the absence of a carbon price, is not accounted for. To unlock these benefits, the private sector needs clear and credible long-term policy frameworks that provide the right market incentives. 106 Chapter 6 – Global Prospects for SDG 7 ENERGY EFFICIENCY Energy efficiency policies are expected to contribute to further reductions in global energy intensity, but not at a rate fast enough to bring the world on a sustainable pathway or to reach the SDG 7.3 target. Global energy intensity is expected to decrease by 2.4% per year on average between 2015 and 2030 in the New Policies Scenario, faster than the 2.2% improvement seen over the 2010–15 period but still short of the 2.6% annual improvement required to meet the SDG 7.3 target. Although intensity improvements accelerate in nearly all world regions, emerging economies make the fastest improvements, with the Asia Pacific region decreasing energy intensity at a rate of 3.3% annually. A number of significant energy efficiency policies currently under development are expected to boost energy intensity reduction in the New Policies Scenario. These include the strengthening of mandatory energy performance regulations in various regions, as well as the implementation of new policy packages announced in the European Union and China. In absolute terms, the largest savings come from avoided coal use in industry in China, which can in large part be attributed to policies to phase out older, more inefficient coal-based capacity and reduce pollutant emissions. The next largest contributions come from reduced oil demand in the transport sectors of the United States and the European Union, where passenger light-duty vehicle (PLDV) fuel-economy standards are set to become more stringent. FIGURE 6.4 • Energy intensity by region (TPES/GDP (toe per thousand 2010 USD PPP)) in the New Policies Scenario 0.4 Central and South America Europe North America Asia-Pacific 0.3 Sub-Saharan Africa Eurasia Middle East 0.2 0.1 - 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Source: IEA 2017a, based on WHO Household Energy Survey Database and IEA Energy Balances; www.iea.org/sdg. Note: The geographical groupings presented here are derived from the World Energy Outlook and are described in Annex 1 of the World Energy Model documentation: https://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/2017/WEM_Documentation_WEO2017.pdf. They do not necessarily correspond to regional groupings used in other chapters of this report. The Sustainable Development Scenario shows that, in order to bring the world on a sustainable energy path, average annual improvements in global energy intensity need to accelerate to 3.4% annually to achieve critical energy sector objectives, bringing about an early peak in CO2 emissions (SDG 13), delivering universal modern energy access by 2030, and reducing harmful air pollution. 107 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 CONCLUSIONS Overall, the prospects for achieving the targets of SDG 7 have improved. The falling cost of renewable electricity is accelerating the deployment of low-carbon electricity and making decentralized electricity more affordable and accessible than ever before, and new policies are raising ambitions and improving the energy intensity of the global economy. However, global energy scenarios reflecting current and planned policies show that the world is far from being on track to achieve the targets of SDG 7. The IEA’s Sustainable Development Scenario shows that delivering on energy-related SDGs—universal energy access, climate mitigation, and reduction of local air pollution—in an integrated manner is achievable, and would cost an additional $8 trillion, relative to current ambitions, through 2040. The objective is achievable; however, delivering on these goals, which are a prerequisite for many other SDGs, requires immediate and dramatic changes to the global energy system, including a peak in coal demand by 2020, a near-complete decarbonization of the power sector, and rapid electrification of many end uses. REFERENCES IEA (International Energy Agency). 2017. “Energy Access Outlook 2017: from Poverty to Prosperity.” IEA, Paris. ———. 2017b. World Energy Outlook 2017. Paris: IEA. ———. 2017c. World Energy Statistics and Balances 2017, www.iea.org/statistics/. IEA (International Energy Agency) and the World Bank. 2017. Sustainable Energy for All Global Tracking Framework 2017—Progress toward Sustainable Energy. World Bank, Washington, DC. IRENA (International Renewable Energy Agency). Forthcoming. REmap: Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Future, 2018 Edition: Analysis. Bonn: IRENA 108 Chapter 6 – Global Prospects for SDG 7 109 110 DATA ANNEX ENERGY ACCESS Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l Afghanistan d g 43 90 84 98 79 9 21 28 32 Albania 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 40 65 74 77 Algeria 99 99 99 100 99 86 92 93 93 American Samoa Andorra 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Angola e 34 32 41 71 16 37 44 47 48 Anguilla 96 100 100 100 Antigua and Barbuda 94 96 97 100 97 97 98 99 99 Argentina e 99 100 100 95 98 98 98 Armenia d d 99 100 100 100 100 100 82 94 96 97 Aruba e e 92 93 95 96 100 92 Australia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Austria 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Azerbaijan c 99 100 100 100 100 100 73 91 94 96 Bahamas 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Bahrain k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Bangladesh d g d g g g 32 55 62 76 94 69 7 13 16 18 Barbados k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 99 99 99 Belarus 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 94 97 98 98 Belgium 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Belize e 90 92 92 97 88 78 83 85 85 Benin g c 21 34 34 41 71 18 2 5 6 6 Bermuda 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Bhutan c 73 97 100 100 100 32 46 51 53 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) h h 70 84 90 93 99 79 65 77 80 64 Bosnia and Herzegovina 100 100 100 100 100 38 54 60 63 Botswana 27 48 56 61 78 37 45 58 62 64 Brazil 87 h h 94 99 100 100 100 100 87 94 95 96 British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Bulgaria 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 65 86 88 89 Burkina Faso d d 9 13 19 19 61 1 3 6 8 9 Burundi d g 3 5 7 8 50 2 1 1 1 1 Cambodia d d d 17 31 56 50 100 36 5 11 15 18 Cameroon c c 41 53 57 60 92 21 10 18 21 23 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l Canada 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Data Annex Cabo Verde e 81 88 93 93 92 57 67 70 71 Cayman Islands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 Central African Republic c c 6 10 13 14 34 0 1 1 1 1 Chad c 3 6 8 9 31 2 3 3 3 3 Channel Islands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Chile 92 h h 98 99 100 100 100 100 86 91 92 92 China g 100 100 100 100 100 47 55 58 59 Colombia 90 d d h h 95 97 98 99 100 96 80 88 91 92 Comoros 40 63 73 78 92 72 1 4 7 9 Democratic Republic of the Congo c d 7 13 14 17 47 0 4 4 4 4 Congo 43 52 57 74 23 10 18 22 24 Cook Islands 99 100 100 100 100 83 85 85 84 Costa Rica h h 99 99 100 100 100 88 92 93 93 Cote d'Ivoire e c c c 49 59 62 64 92 38 18 18 18 18 Croatia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 90 92 93 Cuba g 97 100 100 100 100 100 68 77 79 79 Curaþao 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Cyprus 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Czech Republic 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 93 97 97 97 Denmark 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Djibouti 57 53 52 52 67 0 5 8 10 12 Dominica 81 95 100 100 78 87 90 91 Dominican Republic h h h 89 98 98 100 100 100 80 87 90 90 Ecuador h h 93 97 99 100 100 100 87 94 95 96 Egypt d d 98 100 100 100 100 100 83 96 97 98 El Salvador h h h 85 92 95 99 99 99 57 78 84 86 Equatorial Guinea 67 68 91 53 23 31 34 34 Eritrea 29 40 44 47 75 39 6 12 15 16 Estonia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 79 90 92 93 Ethiopia d f f f f 13 25 27 43 85 27 1 3 3 4 Faeroe Islands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Fiji 75 90 96 99 99 98 31 37 39 40 Finland 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 France incl. Monaco 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 French Polynesia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Gabon d 74 85 89 91 97 55 59 74 77 79 Gambia c 34 40 45 48 69 16 3 3 3 3 Georgia I 99 100 100 100 100 41 66 74 78 Germany 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Ghana d d d d 45 65 78 79 90 67 6 14 19 22 Gibraltar 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Greece 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 88 94 94 94 111 112 Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l Greenland 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Grenada 86 90 91 92 93 96 96 97 Guam k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Guatemala h h 73 84 85 92 97 86 39 43 45 45 Guinea c c c 17 26 30 34 82 7 1 1 1 1 Guinea-Bissau g c 6 17 15 30 0 1 1 2 2 Guyana c 75 80 87 84 90 82 36 62 71 74 Haiti d 34 36 38 39 65 0 3 4 4 4 Honduras h h 68 81 89 88 100 72 30 46 51 53 Hong Kong (SAR, China) 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Hungary 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Iceland 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 India g 59 76 81 85 98 78 22 34 39 41 Indonesia g g g g g g 86 94 97 98 100 95 5 40 54 58 Iran (Islamic Republic of) d g 98 99 100 100 100 100 86 97 98 98 Iraq 98 100 100 100 100 75 95 97 98 Ireland 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Isle of Man 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Israel 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Italy and San Marino 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Jamaica 70 h 85 93 96 98 100 96 73 86 89 91 Japan 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Jordan 97 d 99 100 100 100 100 100 97 99 99 99 Kazakhstan 99 100 100 100 100 100 83 93 95 95 Kenya d d f f f 16 19 36 56 78 39 2 8 12 13 Kiribati e 63 81 85 88 82 2 3 4 6 Democratic People's Republic of Korea 29 36 39 3 7 10 11 Republic of Korea k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 96 97 97 97 Kosovo 99 100 100 Kuwait 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Kyrgyzstan I c 100 99 100 100 100 100 52 72 78 81 Lao People's Democratic Republic 43 70 81 87 97 80 4 5 5 6 Latvia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 86 93 95 95 Lebanon 100 100 100 100 100 Lesotho c d 4 19 28 30 66 16 18 30 34 36 Liberia g d d d 5 9 20 34 1 1 1 1 1 Libya 100 99 99 99 99 96 100 100 100 100 Liechtenstein 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Lithuania 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Luxembourg 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 China, Macao Special Administrative Region k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 100 100 100 100 100 44 59 64 66 Madagascar d d d 14 17 19 23 67 17 1 1 1 1 d d d g g g Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Malawi 5 9 12 11 42 4 2 2 2 3 Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l Malaysia 99 100 100 100 100 95 96 96 96 Data Annex Maldives e e 84 97 100 100 100 100 32 84 92 94 Mali 10 25 32 35 84 2 1 1 1 1 Malta 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Marshall Islands 68 83 90 93 95 89 13 55 64 65 Mauritania g 33 39 42 81 0 29 40 44 47 Mauritius e 99 99 99 99 92 100 87 92 93 93 Mexico h h h 98 99 99 100 100 100 81 84 85 85 Micronesia, Federated States of e e 46 65 72 75 92 71 11 12 12 12 Republic of Moldova 100 100 100 100 100 68 87 91 92 Monaco 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Mongolia e c 67 79 81 82 96 44 22 34 40 43 Montenegro 100 100 100 100 100 55 65 68 69 Morocco e 70 91 92 100 100 100 90 96 96 97 Mozambique 7 17 22 24 64 5 3 3 4 4 Myanmar g e 49 52 57 89 40 5 11 15 18 Namibia d 37 45 50 52 77 29 33 39 41 42 Nauru 99 99 99 99 74 89 91 91 Nepal c d d d 28 67 85 91 95 85 15 22 26 28 Netherlands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 New Caledonia k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 New Zealand 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Nicaragua h 73 78 82 82 99 57 34 46 50 52 Niger c 6 13 15 16 65 5 1 2 2 2 Nigeria 27 d d g g g 43 48 56 59 86 41 1 2 4 5 Niue 100 100 100 Northern Mariana Islands k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Norway including Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Oman k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 85 94 95 95 Pakistan 75 90 96 99 100 99 23 36 41 43 Palau g 99 100 99 100 97 64 83 86 87 Panama 70 e e e 81 87 92 93 99 81 79 86 88 89 Papua New Guinea g 12 20 21 23 73 15 7 11 12 13 Paraguay h h c c c 89 97 99 98 100 96 44 58 64 66 Peru h h h 72 88 93 95 100 76 35 66 72 75 Philippines 73 84 89 91 97 86 36 42 43 43 Poland 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Portugal 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Puerto Rico k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 Qatar 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 92 98 98 98 Romania 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 65 81 85 86 Russian Federation 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 93 97 98 98 Rwanda d d g j j j 6 10 20 29 80 18 0 0 1 1 Samoa d 88 97 98 100 100 100 20 29 32 32 113 114 Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l San Marino 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Sao Tome and Principe c c 53 60 69 65 73 51 18 22 19 17 Saudi Arabia k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 95 96 96 96 Senegal c d d d d 38 54 61 65 88 38 32 32 32 32 Serbia c 100 100 100 100 100 52 69 74 76 Seychelles e 94 97 99 100 99 100 77 88 90 90 Sierra Leone c d d d 11 16 20 47 3 0 1 1 1 Singapore 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Sint Maarten (Dutch part) 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Slovak Republic 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 94 97 97 97 Slovenia 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 89 95 96 96 Solomon Islands 7 32 43 48 70 42 6 8 8 8 Somalia 20 27 30 57 12 1 1 2 2 South Africa g g g g g 71 83 86 84 93 68 56 77 82 85 South Sudan e 2 7 9 22 6 1 1 1 1 Spain 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Sri Lanka g 85 92 96 100 95 16 22 25 26 Saint Kitts and Nevis 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Saint Lucia e 94 97 98 95 98 86 95 97 97 Sint Maarten (French part) e 64 70 72 90 100 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 80 93 99 100 97 100 95 96 96 96 Sudan 33 d c c 23 35 45 39 70 22 14 29 37 41 Suriname c 97 91 88 87 96 69 80 87 89 90 Swaziland c c 46 65 66 83 61 27 42 47 50 Sweden 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Switzerland-Liechtenstein 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Syrian Arab Republic g 93 99 100 100 100 97 99 99 99 Tajikistan c 98 99 100 100 100 100 39 67 77 80 Tanzania d g g g 10 15 19 33 65 17 1 2 2 2 Thailand d f 82 100 100 100 100 100 68 72 74 74 Timor-Leste d 38 58 63 92 49 2 5 6 7 Togo c c d 17 31 46 47 87 19 0 4 6 7 Tonga e e e 85 92 95 97 99 97 48 56 58 59 Trinidad and Tobago e 91 99 100 100 100 100 99 99 99 99 Tunisia g g e 95 100 100 100 100 100 93 98 99 99 Turkey I 100 100 100 100 100 Turkmenistan d I 100 100 100 100 100 100 96 99 99 99 Turks and Caicos Islands 89 e e 96 94 95 96 100 43 Tuvalu 97 99 99 100 99 19 38 47 50 Uganda e d d d 8 15 20 27 58 18 1 1 1 1 Ukraine 100 100 100 100 100 88 94 95 96 United Arab Emirates 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 98 99 99 United Kingdom 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 k k k k k k k Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 United States 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Access to electricity (% of population a) Access to Clean Cooking (% of population) Country Total Urban Rural b Total 1990 2000 2010 2014 2016 2016 2016 2000 2010 2014 2016 l Uruguay h 99 100 100 100 100 96 98 98 98 Data Annex Uzbekistan 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 89 91 92 Vanuatu e e e 22 37 43 58 91 46 12 13 13 13 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 98 99 99 100 100 96 96 97 97 96 Viet Nam c 86 98 99 100 100 100 14 47 61 67 United States Virgin Islands 100 k k k k k k k 100 100 100 100 100 100 Palestine (State of) g g c 100 100 100 100 100 100 Yemen g 50 63 66 72 97 58 52 61 64 65 Zambia 14 e e e d 17 22 28 27 62 3 14 15 16 16 Zimbabwe c 34 36 32 38 86 16 32 30 30 29 World 70 77 80 84 87 97 76 50 56 58 59 High income 93 97 100 100 100 100 100 97 98 99 99 Low income 4 13 16 23 35 65 22 4 5 6 7 Lower middle income 48 63 69 76 84 96 76 33 38 42 47 Upper middle income 91 95 96 98 99 100 97 67 73 78 81 Central Asia and Southern Asia 45 60 68 77 87 98 80 26 37 41 43 Eastern Asia and South-eastern Asia 82 91 93 96 97 99 95 45 55 59 60 Latin America and the Caribbean 85 91 94 96 98 99 91 78 85 87 87 Northern America and Europe 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 96 98 98 99 Oceania 80 81 82 82 83 99 46 78 78 78 78 Sub-Saharan Africa 15 26 29 33 43 76 23 9 11 13 13 Western Asia and Northern Africa 76 80 89 92 93 99 85 77 87 88 89 Note: Unless otherwise noted, data are World Bank estimates based on the statistical model described in chapter 2 in the main report. a. Most surveys report data on the percentage of households with access to electricity rather than on the percentage of the population with access. b. Data are calculated based on the urban and total population with access and are not based on a statistical model. c. Based on Multi-Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) d. Based on Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) e. Based on Census f. Based on Living Standards Measurement Survey (LSMS) g. Based on other National Surveys conducted by national statistical agencies h. Based on Socio-Economic Database for Latin America and the Caribbean (SEDLAC) i. Based on Europe and Central Asia Poverty Database (ECAPOV) j. Based on Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) k. Based on assumption for countries considered "developed" by the UN or which are classified as High Income Countries (HIC) l. Based on the World Health Organization Global Health Observatory 115 116 ENERGY EFFICIENCY Energy Intensity (MJ/USD 2011 PPP) Compound annual growth rate of Energy Intensity (%) Country 1990 2000 2010 2014 2015 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014 2014-2015 Afghanistan 1.9 1.7 2.9 2.3 2.5 -1.1% 5.7% -5.8% 6.1% a Albania 7.5 4.4 3.1 3.2 2.9 -5.1% -3.6% 0.7% -8.6% b Algeria 3.5 3.5 3.6 4.1 4.1 0.1% 0.2% 3.2% 0.7% b Andorra Angola 4.6 5.2 3.7 3.6 3.6 1.3% -3.4% -0.4% -1.1% b Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda 3.8 3.2 4.1 4.0 3.9 -1.8% 2.6% -1.2% -1.6% a Argentina 5.4 4.7 4.3 4.3 4.3 -1.5% -0.9% 0.4% -0.1% b Armenia 24.4 9.4 5.4 5.3 5.4 -9.1% -5.4% -0.2% 0.7% b Aruba 2.4 7.6 7.6 3.3 3.3 12.4% 0.0% -19.1% 1.4% a Australia 7.4 6.4 5.9 5.2 5.0 -1.5% -0.9% -3.2% -2.3% b Austria 4.3 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.6 -1.2% 0.2% -2.4% 1.5% b Azerbaijan 15.6 13.2 3.4 3.8 3.7 -1.7% -12.8% 2.9% -0.9% b Bahamas 4.1 3.5 4.2 4.0 4.0 -1.5% 1.8% -1.2% 1.3% a Bahrain 12.4 11.0 10.4 9.9 9.8 -1.2% -0.6% -1.3% -1.4% b Bangladesh 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.1 3.1 -1.0% -0.3% -2.3% 0.3% b Barbados 4.6 4.2 4.7 3.8 3.8 -1.0% 1.1% -5.0% -0.6% a Belarus 22.4 13.6 7.5 6.8 6.5 -4.8% -5.8% -2.2% -5.3% b Belgium 6.6 6.4 5.6 4.8 4.7 -0.3% -1.2% -4.0% -0.9% b Belize 8.5 6.4 5.1 4.6 5.1 -2.9% -2.3% -2.5% 11.5% a Benin 9.6 7.3 9.3 8.6 9.1 -2.7% 2.5% -1.8% 5.3% b Bermuda 2.9 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.0 -2.5% 0.5% -0.3% -14.9% a Bhutan 30.0 21.8 12.6 11.2 10.4 -3.1% -5.4% -2.7% -7.4% a Bolivia 4.3 5.6 4.9 5.2 4.9 2.6% -1.3% 1.2% -4.2% b Bosnia and Herzegovina 39.1 7.6 7.5 8.8 8.7 -15.1% -0.2% 3.9% -0.3% b Botswana 4.6 4.2 3.4 3.3 3.4 -0.9% -2.2% -0.5% 1.7% b Brazil 3.8 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.1 0.4% -0.1% 1.0% 2.1% b Brunei Darussalam 3.3 3.7 4.3 4.7 3.7 1.0% 1.7% 2.3% -23.1% b Bulgaria 14.6 10.6 6.6 6.4 6.4 -3.1% -4.6% -1.0% 0.4% b Burkina Faso 12.9 6.8 6.5 6.1 6.0 -6.2% -0.4% -1.7% -1.1% a Burundi 9.8 11.3 13.3 7.5 7.7 1.5% 1.6% -13.4% 3.0% a Cambodia 8.5 6.2 5.6 5.8 -3.2% -2.5% 3.3% b Cameroon 6.2 6.9 5.5 4.9 4.8 1.0% -2.2% -3.1% -1.7% b Canada 10.2 9.2 8.0 7.6 7.3 -1.0% -1.4% -1.2% -4.0% b Cabo Verde 4.0 2.7 3.2 2.8 2.8 -4.0% 1.7% -3.3% 0.4% a Cayman Islands Central African Republic 11.3 7.3 5.7 8.5 8.1 -4.3% -2.4% 10.4% -4.4% a Chad 6.8 6.9 3.2 2.8 2.8 0.2% -7.5% -3.2% -0.2% a Channel Islands Chile 4.9 4.8 3.9 3.8 3.8 -0.2% -2.1% -0.9% 0.2% b China 21.0 10.1 8.3 7.1 6.7 -7.1% -1.9% -3.9% -5.8% b Colombia 3.9 3.2 2.6 2.3 2.3 -2.0% -2.1% -2.7% -3.6% b a Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Comoros 3.2 4.0 4.8 4.5 4.7 2.3% 1.7% -1.4% 4.2% Energy Intensity (MJ/USD 2011 PPP) Compound annual growth rate of Energy Intensity (%) Country 1990 2000 2010 2014 2015 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014 2014-2015 Democratic Republic of the Congo 11.1 23.4 21.1 22.6 20.9 7.7% -1.0% 1.7% -7.3% b Congo 2.6 2.1 3.1 4.1 4.0 -2.4% 4.1% 7.2% -1.5% b Data Annex Cook Islands Costa Rica 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.0 2.9 0.6% 0.6% -2.2% -4.4% b Côte d'Ivoire 4.6 5.8 7.8 8.4 7.2 2.2% 3.0% 2.1% -14.3% b Croatia 6.8 5.0 4.4 3.9 4.1 -2.9% -1.3% -2.8% 2.7% b Cuba 5.0 4.2 2.5 2.1 2.1 -1.7% -5.2% -3.7% -1.2% b Curaçao Cyprus 4.2 4.3 3.6 3.3 3.3 0.1% -1.6% -2.7% 0.4% b Czechia 10.1 8.0 6.4 5.7 5.5 -2.4% -2.2% -2.6% -3.9% b Denmark 4.2 3.5 3.3 2.7 2.6 -1.9% -0.3% -5.6% -1.7% b Djibouti 3.5 5.2 4.8 4.1 3.4 4.0% -0.9% -3.5% -17.4% a Dominica 2.0 2.9 3.4 3.3 3.6 3.6% 1.5% -0.5% 9.3% a Dominican Republic 4.4 4.4 2.8 2.4 2.5 0.0% -4.5% -3.7% 1.3% b Ecuador 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.4 3.6 1.3% -1.1% -0.8% 6.0% b Egypt 4.0 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.5 -1.9% 1.2% 0.1% -5.5% b El Salvador 4.3 4.4 4.1 3.5 3.6 0.2% -0.9% -3.5% 3.8% b Equatorial Guinea 11.8 1.4 2.1 2.1 2.2 -19.3% 4.4% -0.8% 7.2% a Eritrea 5.2 5.0 4.7 4.8 -0.4% -1.3% 1.8% b Estonia 31.3 9.0 7.8 7.1 6.3 -11.7% -1.5% -2.3% -10.7% b Ethiopia 30.6 32.3 19.0 14.7 13.7 0.5% -5.2% -6.2% -6.8% b Faroe Islands Fiji 4.8 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.9 -1.8% -1.5% 3.9% 20.3% a Finland 8.2 7.5 7.2 6.7 6.4 -0.9% -0.5% -1.7% -5.0% b France 5.4 5.0 4.6 4.1 4.1 -0.9% -0.8% -2.7% 0.5% b French Polynesia Gabon 2.7 2.8 8.4 6.7 6.5 0.5% 11.6% -5.6% -2.4% b Gambia 5.0 4.9 4.4 4.6 4.5 -0.2% -1.0% 1.2% -2.6% a Georgia 13.5 8.3 4.9 5.6 5.8 -4.7% -5.1% 3.3% 2.5% b Germany 5.9 4.7 4.1 3.6 3.6 -2.4% -1.2% -3.1% -1.0% b Ghana 7.9 6.1 4.2 3.6 3.7 -2.5% -3.7% -4.2% 5.0% b Gibraltar Greece 4.3 4.2 3.6 3.7 3.7 -0.1% -1.5% 0.6% 0.5% b Greenland Grenada 2.3 3.0 3.4 2.9 3.0 2.5% 1.4% -3.8% 0.9% a Guam Guatemala 3.9 4.2 4.3 4.9 4.5 0.6% 0.4% 2.9% -7.8% b Guinea 15.5 12.8 11.4 10.2 10.6 -1.9% -1.2% -2.8% 4.1% a Guinea-Bissau 12.6 13.7 12.9 12.4 12.0 0.8% -0.6% -1.0% -2.9% a Guyana 11.6 9.3 7.4 6.6 6.4 -2.2% -2.3% -2.6% -3.8% a Haiti 5.2 5.7 10.6 9.9 10.1 0.8% 6.5% -1.5% 1.6% b Honduras 6.3 5.8 5.9 6.0 6.2 -0.9% 0.2% 0.6% 2.3% b Hong Kong (SAR, China) 2.3 2.5 1.7 1.6 1.5 0.7% -3.9% -2.1% -4.2% b Hungary 8.4 5.7 5.0 4.2 4.3 -3.8% -1.4% -4.1% 2.6% b Iceland 12.8 13.6 18.4 18.1 16.6 0.6% 3.0% -0.4% -8.6% b India 8.4 7.0 5.4 5.0 4.7 -1.8% -2.7% -1.9% -4.6% b Indonesia 4.9 5.3 4.3 3.7 3.5 0.8% -2.1% -3.9% -4.3% b Iran (Islamic Republic of) 5.1 6.6 6.6 7.7 7.8 2.6% 0.0% 4.0% 1.3% b Iraq 4.2 3.8 4.0 4.0 3.7 -1.0% 0.6% 0.1% -7.7% b 117 118 Energy Intensity (MJ/USD 2011 PPP) Compound annual growth rate of Energy Intensity (%) Country 1990 2000 2010 2014 2015 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014 2014-2015 Ireland 5.3 3.7 2.9 2.4 1.9 -3.5% -2.5% -4.9% -17.6% b Isle of Man Israel 5.2 4.7 4.3 3.4 3.6 -1.1% -0.8% -5.5% 4.4% b Italy 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.1 -0.1% -0.2% -3.2% 3.2% b Jamaica 6.6 7.6 5.0 5.1 5.2 1.4% -4.1% 0.7% 2.0% b Japan 4.9 5.0 4.6 3.9 3.7 0.3% -1.0% -4.0% -3.3% b Jordan 6.1 5.5 4.4 4.5 4.6 -1.0% -2.3% 0.8% 3.0% b Kazakhstan 14.4 10.1 8.8 7.9 7.9 -3.5% -1.3% -2.8% 0.7% b Kenya 8.1 8.7 8.0 7.8 7.8 0.8% -0.9% -0.5% 0.3% b Kiribati 3.3 2.8 4.8 4.0 4.1 -1.7% 5.7% -4.4% 2.6% a Democratic People's Republic of Korea Republic of Korea 7.8 8.1 7.0 6.6 6.5 0.3% -1.5% -1.2% -1.2% b Kosovo Kuwait 4.9 5.5 6.0 5.0 5.3 1.1% 0.9% -4.4% 7.0% b Kyrgyzstan 20.5 9.6 7.6 9.2 8.6 -7.4% -2.3% 5.0% -6.2% b Lao People's Democratic Republic 8.7 5.6 4.8 3.9 5.2 -4.3% -1.6% -4.7% 31.3% a Latvia 21.4 6.1 4.9 4.1 3.9 -11.8% -2.1% -4.5% -4.4% b Lebanon 3.9 5.1 3.8 4.2 4.2 2.8% -2.9% 2.4% 0.6% b Lesotho 16.4 14.4 10.8 10.3 9.7 -1.3% -2.8% -1.2% -5.7% a Liberia 20.7 20.2 27.0 25.4 26.0 -0.2% 3.0% -1.6% 2.4% a Libya 5.2 5.6 4.8 4.4 4.2 0.9% -1.7% -1.7% -5.3% b Liechtenstein Lithuania 28.9 7.0 4.5 3.8 3.9 -13.2% -4.3% -4.2% 1.4% b Luxembourg 6.4 3.9 3.8 3.1 2.9 -4.8% -0.3% -5.2% -6.3% b Macao (SAR, China) 1.0 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.7 2.2% -7.8% -6.9% 50.5% a Macedonia, FYR 5.4 6.4 5.1 4.4 4.2 1.7% -2.2% -3.6% -4.1% b Madagascar 4.4 5.2 5.1 5.3 5.4 1.6% -0.1% 0.7% 1.8% a Malawi 9.1 6.6 4.9 4.3 4.1 -3.2% -2.9% -3.2% -5.6% a Malaysia 4.8 5.4 5.2 5.1 4.7 1.2% -0.4% -0.2% -8.8% b Maldives 17.2 3.6 3.5 4.0 3.8 -14.5% -0.3% 3.3% -2.9% a Mali 4.0 3.5 2.8 2.9 2.8 -1.3% -2.4% 0.9% -1.6% a Malta 5.1 2.9 3.0 2.3 1.8 -5.3% 0.1% -5.9% -22.9% b Marshall Islands 10.6 11.8 10.9 11.3 1.1% -1.9% 3.7% a Mauritania 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.6 3.6 -0.4% -0.3% -0.6% -1.6% a Mauritius 3.6 3.2 2.8 2.5 2.6 -1.0% -1.5% -2.0% 0.1% b Mexico 4.8 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.7 -1.5% -0.1% -1.5% -3.0% b Micronesia (Federated States of) Moldova 81.2 14.3 10.5 8.2 8.4 -16.0% -3.0% -6.2% 2.8% b Monaco Mongolia 12.8 9.0 7.9 6.7 6.1 -3.4% -1.3% -4.1% -8.5% b Montenegro 5.4 4.4 4.4 -5.4% 2.1% b Morocco 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.2 3.2 0.8% -0.4% -1.1% -2.6% b Mozambique 49.4 29.6 18.8 16.6 17.3 -5.0% -4.5% -3.0% 4.4% b Myanmar 14.8 8.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 -4.9% -10.2% 0.8% -0.2% b Namibia 3.7 3.5 3.3 3.3 -0.5% -1.4% -1.5% b Nauru Nepal 10.8 9.3 8.0 7.6 7.4 -1.5% -1.5% -1.2% -2.4% b Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Netherlands 5.9 4.8 4.6 4.0 3.9 -2.1% -0.3% -3.8% -0.7% b Energy Intensity (MJ/USD 2011 PPP) Compound annual growth rate of Energy Intensity (%) Country 1990 2000 2010 2014 2015 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014 2014-2015 New Caledonia New Zealand 6.7 6.6 5.5 5.5 5.4 -0.2% -1.8% 0.2% -1.7% b Data Annex Nicaragua 6.8 6.1 5.4 5.2 5.4 -1.1% -1.2% -0.5% 3.5% b Niger 7.2 7.0 7.1 6.9 -0.3% 0.3% -1.8% b Nigeria 9.6 10.3 6.1 5.6 5.7 0.7% -5.1% -2.2% 0.9% b Niue Northern Mariana Islands Norway 4.9 4.2 4.7 3.6 3.8 -1.4% 1.0% -6.4% 4.8% b Oman 2.8 3.2 5.7 6.4 6.3 1.3% 6.0% 2.9% -1.3% b Pakistan 5.5 5.5 4.8 4.5 4.4 0.1% -1.3% -1.6% -2.5% b Palau 11.1 11.4 11.7 10.2 0.2% 0.6% -12.2% a Panama 3.2 3.4 2.7 2.3 2.2 0.4% -2.2% -4.1% -4.4% b Papua New Guinea 13.2 9.9 9.5 7.7 9.3 -2.9% -0.4% -5.0% 20.1% a Paraguay 5.1 5.0 4.4 3.9 4.0 -0.1% -1.2% -3.3% 1.8% b Peru 3.5 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.8 -1.5% -0.7% -0.1% 0.3% b Philippines 4.8 5.1 3.2 3.0 3.1 0.5% -4.4% -1.5% 2.9% b Poland 11.0 6.6 5.1 4.3 4.1 -5.0% -2.6% -4.3% -2.8% b Portugal 3.5 3.8 3.4 3.3 3.3 1.0% -1.2% -1.1% 2.1% b Puerto Rico 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 24.5% 7.8% 15.9% 5.2% a Qatar 9.3 7.1 5.2 6.5 6.4 -2.7% -3.1% 5.7% -1.1% b Romania 47093.5 6.4 4.1 3.4 3.3 -58.9% -4.5% -4.5% -2.5% b Russian Federation 12.0 5.0 8.7 8.3 8.4 -8.5% 5.8% -1.1% 0.8% b Rwanda 5.6 8.5 6.1 5.2 4.9 4.2% -3.3% -3.6% -6.6% a Samoa 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3 5.2 0.2% 0.2% -1.4% 21.6% a San Marino Sao Tome and Principe 32.4 5.9 5.2 4.7 4.7 -15.6% -1.3% -2.5% -1.1% a Saudi Arabia 3.5 4.6 6.2 5.8 5.8 2.7% 3.1% -1.7% -0.2% b Senegal 5.1 5.3 5.7 5.1 5.0 0.5% 0.7% -2.9% -1.6% b Serbia 18.9 9.6 7.1 5.9 6.6 -6.6% -3.0% -4.3% 10.5% b Seychelles 2.2 5.4 3.3 2.6 2.6 9.2% -4.6% -6.4% 2.9% a Sierra Leone 9.3 13.1 7.6 5.8 7.0 3.5% -5.3% -6.7% 20.8% a Singapore 4.6 3.8 2.9 2.5 2.4 -2.0% -2.5% -3.8% -3.6% b Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovak Republic 18.6 8.8 5.5 4.5 4.5 -7.2% -4.6% -4.8% -1.0% b Slovenia 7.1 5.9 5.2 4.7 4.6 -1.8% -1.3% -2.4% -3.4% b Solomon Islands 9.4 7.7 6.3 5.2 5.0 -2.0% -2.0% -4.5% -3.7% a Somalia South Africa 10.5 10.5 9.7 9.0 8.7 0.0% -0.8% -1.7% -3.7% b South Sudan 1.3 1.1 -16.3% b Spain 4.1 4.2 3.5 3.3 3.3 0.3% -1.7% -1.6% 0.6% b Sri Lanka 3.7 3.3 2.4 2.0 2.1 -1.0% -3.4% -3.7% 1.5% b Saint Kitts and Nevis 3.7 -100.0% Saint Lucia 2.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 4.7% 0.1% 0.6% -1.3% a Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2.2 2.8 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.4% 1.1% -1.3% -0.5% a Sudan 9.8 7.2 4.7 4.0 4.0 -3.1% -4.2% -4.0% -0.3% b Suriname 5.7 4.0 3.4 3.4 -3.5% -3.8% -1.4% b Swaziland 4.3 6.6 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5% -2.8% -2.5% 2.3% a 119 120 Energy Intensity (MJ/USD 2011 PPP) Compound annual growth rate of Energy Intensity (%) Country 1990 2000 2010 2014 2015 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014 2014-2015 Sweden 7.5 6.1 5.3 4.7 4.3 -2.0% -1.4% -2.9% -9.4% b Switzerland 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.2 -0.9% -1.4% -2.7% -2.9% b Syrian Arab Republic 11.6 10.4 10.0 4.4 4.0 -1.1% -0.5% -18.3% -9.5% b Tajikistan 11.5 12.3 5.7 5.1 5.0 0.6% -7.4% -2.7% -1.1% b Tanzania 11.2 11.5 9.2 8.5 8.3 0.2% -2.1% -2.0% -2.2% b Thailand 4.7 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.4 1.1% 0.4% 0.5% -2.6% b Timor-Leste Togo 10.3 13.9 16.6 14.6 14.3 3.0% 1.8% -3.1% -1.9% b Tonga 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.0 -0.1% -0.1% -1.8% 1.5% a Trinidad and Tobago 16.7 17.7 20.2 19.1 19.1 0.6% 1.3% -1.4% -0.3% b Tunisia 4.5 4.2 3.9 3.7 3.8 -0.7% -0.7% -1.2% 2.0% b Turkey 3.6 3.6 3.4 2.9 2.9 0.1% -0.5% -3.8% 0.0% b Turkmenistan 23.9 25.9 18.8 14.3 13.9 0.8% -3.2% -6.6% -3.0% b Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu 3.5 3.3 3.9 3.7 3.9 -0.3% 1.5% -1.3% 6.0% a Uganda 20.6 12.4 10.0 9.7 9.6 -4.9% -2.1% -0.9% -0.2% a Ukraine 19.4 23.7 15.4 12.5 11.8 2.0% -4.2% -5.2% -5.5% b United Arab Emirates 4.1 4.1 5.5 5.3 5.1 -0.2% 3.1% -1.2% -3.6% b United Kingdom 5.6 4.8 3.8 3.1 3.0 -1.6% -2.4% -4.9% -1.7% b United States 8.7 7.3 6.1 5.6 5.4 -1.7% -1.9% -1.9% -3.8% b Uruguay 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.1 -0.2% -0.2% -0.6% 6.9% b Uzbekistan 30.8 34.5 14.9 11.1 10.0 1.1% -8.0% -7.2% -9.7% b Vanuatu 3.1 4.0 3.9 4.3 3.9 2.4% -0.3% 2.4% -9.3% a Venezuela 5.8 6.1 6.3 5.5 4.7 0.5% 0.4% -3.5% -13.7% b Vietnam 7.5 5.8 6.3 5.7 5.9 -2.5% 0.8% -2.4% 3.5% b United States Virgin Islands Palestine (State of) Yemen 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.2 2.1 0.9% 0.8% 1.0% -36.2% b Zambia 12.1 12.0 7.8 7.4 7.3 -0.1% -4.2% -1.2% -0.7% b Zimbabwe 14.7 13.3 19.5 15.7 15.8 -1.0% 3.9% -5.3% 0.3% b World 7.8 6.6 5.9 5.4 5.3 -1.6% -1.2% -2.1% -2.9% c High income 7.1 6.2 5.4 5.0 4.8 -1.3% -1.4% -2.1% -2.3% c Low income 12.9 13.1 10.9 10.0 9.8 0.2% -1.8% -2.2% -2.3% c Lower middle income 8.5 7.0 5.3 4.8 4.6 -2.0% -2.7% -2.6% -3.8% c Upper middle income 9.0 6.9 6.5 6.0 5.8 -2.7% -0.5% -2.2% -3.8% c Central Asia and Southern Asia 8.2 7.1 5.7 5.4 5.2 -1.4% -2.2% -1.4% -3.6% c Eastern Asia and South-eastern Asia 8.7 7.1 6.7 5.9 5.6 -2.0% -0.7% -3.0% -4.4% c Latin America and the Caribbean 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.9 -0.5% -0.5% -0.8% -1.4% c Northern America and Europe 8.1 6.7 5.6 5.2 5.0 -1.9% -1.7% -2.1% -2.6% c Oceania 7.4 6.4 5.9 5.2 5.1 -1.3% -1.0% -2.7% -1.8% c Sub-Saharan Africa 9.2 9.8 7.8 7.3 7.2 0.6% -2.2% -1.6% -1.5% c Western Asia and Northern Africa 4.5 4.4 5.0 4.4 4.8 -0.3% 1.2% -3.2% 8.6% c a. Source: Energy Balances, UN Statistics Division (2017) b. Source: World Energy Balances, IEA (2017) c. Sources: World Bank analysis based on World Energy Statistics and Balances, IEA (2017); Energy Balances, UN Statistics Division (2017) Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 RENEWABLE ENERGY Data Annex Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Afghanistan a 15.92% 14.84% 19.31% 18.42% 9.60% 0.00% 8.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 12.04 13.09 - 136 Albania b 25.52% 37.12% 38.69% 38.62% 8.20% 2.27% 25.98% 1.53% 0.00% 0.63% 0.00% 0.00% 21.23 9.07 1 82 Algeria b 0.18% 0.26% 0.07% 0.06% 0.01% 0.01% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.58 0.25 - 1,414 American Samoa a 0.00% 0.00% 0.70% 0.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 - - 1 Andorra a 14.27% 19.09% 19.89% 19.75% 0.27% 0.00% 18.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.45% 1.50 0.14 - 8 Angola b 72.26% 54.19% 50.80% 49.57% 45.19% 1.10% 3.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.13 227.64 - 492 Anguilla a 0.30% 0.12% 0.13% 0.11% 0.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.00 - 2 Antigua and Barbuda a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 5 Argentina b 8.92% 8.96% 10.90% 10.04% 0.50% 2.28% 5.14% 2.04% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 131.36 59.50 49 2,385 Armenia b 2.12% 9.36% 7.72% 15.79% 9.35% 0.00% 6.43% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.48 7.96 - 85 Aruba a 0.27% 5.46% 6.93% 6.73% 0.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.42 0.02 - 7 Australia b 8.01% 8.11% 9.28% 9.18% 0.00% 5.31% 1.25% 0.32% 1.07% 1.02% 0.00% 0.22% 103.77 182.77 10 3,233 Austria b 25.14% 30.66% 35.39% 34.39% 0.00% 15.74% 12.47% 2.72% 1.63% 1.05% 0.08% 0.71% 167.49 167.80 27 1,054 Azerbaijan b 0.72% 4.45% 2.12% 2.31% 0.66% 0.31% 1.27% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 4.47 3.21 0 332 Bahamas a 0.00% 1.66% 1.09% 1.21% 0.00% 1.21% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.31 - 26 Bahrain b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 192 Bangladesh b 71.66% 41.05% 37.63% 34.75% 34.55% 0.00% 0.15% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 2.15 383.91 - 1,111 Barbados a 18.94% 9.03% 3.16% 2.79% 0.09% 2.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.32 - 11 Belarus b 0.82% 7.02% 6.63% 6.77% 2.11% 4.44% 0.05% 0.12% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.86 43.58 0 658 Belgium b 1.27% 5.84% 9.07% 9.20% 0.00% 4.66% 0.10% 0.84% 1.69% 1.00% 0.00% 0.91% 61.20 56.21 11 1,395 Belize a 38.01% 33.71% 36.91% 35.02% 0.18% 26.99% 7.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.96 3.32 - 12 Benin b 93.70% 48.12% 52.54% 50.86% 42.08% 8.64% 0.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.22 76.25 - 150 Bermuda a 0.00% 2.39% 1.99% 2.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.36% - 0.12 - 5 BES Islands a 0.00% 0.00% 3.03% 2.97% 0.10% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.11 0.00 - 4 Bhutan a 95.90% 90.89% 87.03% 86.90% 74.98% 0.15% 11.78% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.41 47.21 - 63 Bolivia b 37.36% 20.07% 16.82% 17.54% 6.96% 7.61% 2.94% 0.00% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 8.90 39.93 - 278 Bosnia and Herzegovina b 7.30% 19.57% 41.75% 40.75% 31.88% 1.29% 7.58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.65 59.70 - 180 Botswana b 47.58% 30.19% 28.80% 28.88% 28.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 23.15 - 80 British Virgin Islands a 1.45% 0.85% 1.22% 1.23% 0.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.21% 0.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 0.01 - 2 Brazil b 49.86% 47.01% 41.84% 43.79% 3.21% 18.60% 12.33% 8.55% 0.74% 0.33% 0.00% 0.02% 1,309.41 1,819.04 759 8,877 Brunei Darussalam b 0.67% 0.00% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 0.00 - 39 Bulgaria b 1.92% 14.37% 16.97% 17.65% 7.66% 3.13% 3.03% 1.53% 0.78% 0.97% 0.36% 0.19% 18.35 44.71 6 391 Burkina Faso a 93.16% 81.45% 75.24% 74.17% 73.46% 0.43% 0.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.40 108.52 - 147 Burundi a 95.20% 96.76% 94.60% 95.68% 93.07% 1.12% 1.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.77 48.69 - 52 Cambodia b 0.00% 68.52% 68.01% 64.92% 46.47% 15.13% 3.32% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 8.33 151.48 - 246 Cameroon b 81.59% 78.60% 76.98% 76.54% 64.49% 6.55% 5.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.85 201.72 - 284 Canada b 22.02% 22.08% 22.02% 22.03% 0.00% 5.46% 14.26% 1.03% 0.99% 0.13% 0.00% 0.14% 1,141.36 371.38 74 7,206 Cape Verde a 36.63% 21.74% 26.20% 26.58% 22.91% 0.26% 0.00% 0.00% 3.16% 0.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.22 1.51 - 6 121 122 Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Cayman Islands 5 Central African Republic a 93.49% 79.81% 76.90% 76.57% 38.13% 35.17% 3.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.58 12.94 - 18 Chad a 98.16% 90.79% 89.24% 89.36% 88.02% 1.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 59.32 - 66 Channel Islands Chile b 34.03% 27.04% 26.72% 24.88% 0.00% 16.35% 7.31% 0.00% 0.65% 0.50% 0.00% 0.07% 104.94 154.67 - 1,043 China b 34.08% 12.88% 12.22% 12.41% 4.61% 0.23% 4.58% 0.12% 0.76% 1.40% 0.28% 0.43% 4,201.42 4,797.34 86 73,183 Chinese Taipei b 1.94% 1.55% 2.04% 2.12% 0.00% 0.31% 0.74% 0.15% 0.25% 0.37% 0.00% 0.30% 29.34 12.20 0 1,967 Christmas Island Cocos Islands Colombia b 38.25% 27.93% 24.44% 23.56% 5.73% 6.37% 11.35% 0.10% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 127.39 123.48 1 1,069 Comoros a 49.84% 46.41% 46.62% 45.33% 45.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 1.61 - 4 Congo, Dem. Rep. b 92.05% 96.83% 92.87% 95.82% 78.68% 14.24% 2.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 26.12 836.40 - 900 Congo, Rep. b 65.41% 55.15% 62.40% 62.40% 59.81% 0.80% 1.80% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.53 51.62 - 85 Cook Islands a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 (0.01) - 1 Costa Rica b 45.38% 42.31% 37.84% 38.73% 3.43% 13.52% 16.69% 0.00% 2.23% 0.01% 2.85% 0.00% 33.60 25.16 - 152 Côte d'Ivoire b 73.58% 75.37% 72.22% 64.53% 56.93% 6.41% 1.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.62 178.65 - 282 Croatia b 21.92% 29.78% 33.65% 33.13% 17.98% 0.90% 11.62% 0.37% 1.45% 0.26% 0.17% 0.39% 36.92 51.68 1 270 Cuba b 42.89% 13.16% 18.80% 19.28% 0.13% 15.93% 0.05% 3.13% 0.02% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 2.30 55.44 - 299 Curaçao b 0.00% 0.24% 0.35% 0.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.09 0.00 - 25 Cyprus b 0.50% 6.35% 9.36% 9.94% 0.56% 0.65% 0.00% 0.69% 1.22% 5.52% 0.11% 1.20% 1.29 4.16 0 59 Czech Republic b 3.57% 10.92% 14.83% 14.83% 0.00% 10.78% 0.44% 1.29% 0.14% 0.64% 0.00% 1.54% 22.37 107.99 12 963 Denmark b 7.04% 21.35% 30.27% 33.17% 0.00% 16.93% 0.01% 1.85% 9.87% 0.65% 0.01% 3.85% 72.41 99.29 10 547 Djibouti a 26.59% 34.43% 34.15% 15.38% 15.38% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.76 - 5 Dominica a 14.60% 8.91% 8.61% 7.83% 4.13% 0.00% 3.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.06 0.06 - 1 Dominican Republic b 28.01% 16.98% 18.02% 16.48% 9.13% 4.35% 1.57% 0.00% 0.97% 0.46% 0.00% 0.00% 6.51 30.84 - 227 Ecuador b 24.20% 12.11% 12.22% 13.82% 1.80% 3.36% 8.44% 0.11% 0.06% 0.02% 0.02% 0.00% 43.48 24.31 1 495 Egypt b 8.50% 5.72% 5.87% 5.71% 1.72% 1.79% 1.96% 0.00% 0.20% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 45.86 73.24 - 2,086 El Salvador b 67.14% 30.77% 28.27% 24.40% 10.57% 4.00% 4.52% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.15% 0.16% 11.94 13.23 - 103 Equatorial Guinea a 84.71% 5.95% 7.64% 7.82% 5.65% 0.00% 2.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.46 3.81 - 67 Eritrea b 0.00% 81.25% 79.93% 79.77% 75.84% 3.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 18.74 - 23 Estonia b 3.36% 25.13% 25.33% 27.48% 0.00% 25.49% 0.06% 0.12% 1.47% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 3.56 27.88 0 115 Ethiopia b 96.64% 94.52% 92.07% 92.16% 89.53% 0.87% 1.62% 0.01% 0.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 29.92 1,544.11 0 1,708 Falkland Islands (Malvinas) a 1.13% 3.71% 3.87% 3.89% 0.86% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02 0.01 - 1 Faroe Islands 2.54% 3.38% 6.54% 7.51% 0.00% 0.00% 5.29% 0.00% 2.22% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.62 0.00 - 8 Fiji a 53.09% 29.61% 34.57% 31.26% 1.15% 24.53% 5.51% 0.00% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.34 6.15 - 24 Finland b 24.51% 33.58% 41.24% 43.24% 0.00% 31.67% 7.14% 2.18% 0.99% 0.01% 0.00% 1.25% 125.72 271.83 21 968 France b 10.41% 11.85% 13.35% 13.50% 0.00% 6.60% 2.62% 2.19% 1.02% 0.42% 0.07% 0.57% 242.62 394.21 123 5,632 French Guiana a 5.73% 29.55% 30.03% 32.44% 10.02% 3.71% 16.89% 0.00% 0.00% 1.82% 0.00% 0.00% 1.69 1.24 - 9 French Polynesia a 4.73% 11.57% 10.16% 9.83% 0.41% 0.00% 8.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.45% 0.00% 0.00% 0.73 0.03 - 8 Gabon b 78.28% 85.88% 81.35% 82.01% 21.98% 58.57% 1.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.92 159.26 - 198 Gambia a 61.44% 54.71% 51.93% 51.51% 51.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 5.26 - 10 Georgia b 12.77% 39.15% 31.89% 28.66% 10.37% 0.20% 17.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.06% 0.38% 0.00% 27.84 17.36 - 158 Germany b 2.10% 10.29% 13.38% 14.21% 0.00% 5.00% 0.66% 1.38% 2.75% 1.68% 0.05% 2.69% 541.77 533.79 107 8,328 Ghana b 80.63% 49.78% 45.05% 41.41% 27.88% 7.94% 5.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.85 101.41 - 283 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Data Annex Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Gibraltar a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 6 Greece b 7.81% 11.09% 16.09% 17.17% 0.00% 6.73% 3.28% 1.04% 2.48% 3.35% 0.06% 0.22% 52.40 54.23 6 657 Greenland a 0.00% 9.83% 14.90% 15.53% 0.00% 0.00% 15.41% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.12% 1.23 0.01 - 8 Grenada a 8.34% 10.50% 11.08% 10.92% 10.23% 0.69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.31 - 3 Guadeloupe a 6.75% 1.97% 4.99% 4.68% 0.47% 0.00% 0.35% 0.00% 0.85% 1.66% 1.36% 0.00% 0.78 0.09 - 19 Guam a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 6 Guatemala b 74.97% 66.59% 59.90% 63.65% 57.12% 3.49% 2.70% 0.00% 0.07% 0.10% 0.18% 0.00% 19.97 253.70 - 430 Guinea a 89.30% 75.71% 78.52% 76.27% 73.85% 0.44% 1.98% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.74 102.50 - 138 Guinea-Bissau a 88.58% 87.81% 87.06% 86.85% 79.07% 7.78% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 23.67 - 27 Guyana a 42.23% 33.84% 24.02% 25.26% 4.42% 20.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 6.72 - 27 Haiti b 81.12% 79.02% 78.39% 76.07% 72.06% 3.93% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.12 103.87 - 137 Honduras b 70.13% 53.16% 54.04% 51.54% 40.49% 6.30% 3.70% 0.00% 1.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.89 90.38 - 198 Hong Kong (SAR, China) b 1.07% 0.83% 0.86% 0.85% 0.61% 0.04% 0.00% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.12% 0.44 2.44 0 372 Hungary b 3.86% 13.46% 15.67% 15.56% 0.00% 12.85% 0.14% 1.04% 0.42% 0.14% 0.51% 0.47% 13.79 88.95 7 707 Iceland b 54.67% 75.42% 76.34% 77.03% 0.00% 0.00% 38.87% 0.48% 0.03% 0.00% 37.60% 0.06% 62.89 27.87 1 119 India b 58.65% 39.48% 36.65% 36.02% 26.09% 7.47% 1.66% 0.07% 0.51% 0.19% 0.00% 0.02% 567.34 7,428.26 16 22,241 Indonesia b 58.60% 37.75% 37.45% 36.88% 30.71% 4.36% 0.66% 0.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.48% 0.00% 77.79 2,282.80 42 6,514 Iran (Islamic Republic of) b 1.24% 0.90% 0.94% 0.91% 0.16% 0.16% 0.58% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 38.80 21.14 - 6,565 Iraq b 1.60% 1.71% 0.91% 0.80% 0.00% 0.15% 0.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.78 1.09 - 734 Ireland b 2.28% 5.27% 8.52% 9.08% 0.00% 2.03% 0.60% 0.86% 4.91% 0.13% 0.00% 0.55% 25.24 10.12 4 430 Isle of Man a 0.00% 4.05% 3.81% 4.21% 0.00% 0.00% 0.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.72% 0.01 0.08 - 2 Israel b 5.80% 8.50% 3.68% 3.71% 0.00% 0.07% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 3.58% 0.00% 0.04% 3.70 15.29 - 512 Italy b 3.78% 12.79% 17.09% 16.52% 0.00% 6.74% 3.55% 1.45% 1.16% 1.96% 0.60% 1.07% 400.38 329.48 49 4,715 Jamaica b 7.63% 13.72% 16.12% 16.77% 9.34% 5.01% 0.42% 1.60% 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.12 11.34 1 82 Japan b 4.55% 4.59% 5.63% 6.30% 0.00% 2.00% 2.66% 0.00% 0.16% 1.25% 0.15% 0.07% 546.34 118.65 - 10,560 Jordan b 2.77% 2.97% 3.13% 3.23% 0.07% 0.00% 0.07% 0.00% 0.16% 2.92% 0.00% 0.01% 0.56 6.84 - 229 Kazakhstan b 1.41% 1.38% 1.31% 1.56% 0.18% 0.00% 1.35% 0.00% 0.02% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 21.79 2.93 - 1,587 Kenya b 77.50% 76.27% 75.52% 72.66% 68.85% 0.06% 1.71% 0.00% 0.03% 0.00% 2.02% 0.00% 24.98 450.97 - 655 Kiribati a 5.22% 3.46% 3.47% 4.25% 3.41% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 0.02 - 1 Democratic People's Republic of b 7.19% 13.47% 21.03% 23.12% 1.82% 11.54% 9.76% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 26.90 36.83 - 276 Korea Republic of Korea b 1.63% 1.31% 2.84% 2.71% 0.00% 1.38% 0.13% 0.40% 0.07% 0.26% 0.11% 0.36% 33.79 92.54 18 5,312 Kosovo b 0.00% 20.92% 21.46% 20.45% 18.11% 1.64% 0.68% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.38 11.04 - 56 Kuwait b 0.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 617 Kyrgyzstan b 7.93% 25.59% 26.61% 23.31% 0.07% 0.01% 23.22% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.47 0.12 - 140 Lao People's Democratic Republic a 88.45% 71.51% 60.47% 59.32% 35.89% 12.64% 10.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.18 59.30 - 122 Latvia b 17.57% 33.06% 40.24% 38.10% 0.00% 30.18% 5.07% 0.67% 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 1.78% 11.67 46.06 1 154 Lebanon b 11.34% 5.20% 3.23% 3.65% 2.02% 0.37% 0.77% 0.00% 0.00% 0.49% 0.00% 0.00% 1.56 5.82 - 202 Lesotho a 52.03% 53.45% 51.39% 52.14% 47.65% 0.00% 4.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.50 26.54 - 56 Liberia a 88.82% 89.21% 83.94% 83.85% 10.10% 73.75% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 68.92 - 82 Libya b 3.13% 1.57% 1.75% 1.97% 1.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 6.35 - 323 Liechtenstein a 0.00% 58.69% 62.59% 63.13% 7.29% 0.00% 34.52% 0.00% 0.00% 14.72% 0.00% 6.61% 1.38 0.44 - 3 Lithuania b 3.10% 21.46% 27.71% 28.96% 10.28% 11.52% 1.38% 1.43% 3.20% 0.29% 0.01% 0.85% 13.26 41.76 3 200 Luxembourg b 1.72% 3.66% 6.88% 9.03% 0.00% 1.88% 1.12% 2.33% 1.16% 1.23% 0.00% 1.30% 7.25 2.68 3 148 123 124 Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Macao (SAR, China) a 0.66% 5.81% 10.02% 7.05% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.96% - 2.41 - 34 Macedonia, FYR b 2.41% 22.33% 21.20% 24.22% 12.24% 0.58% 10.11% 0.00% 0.66% 0.12% 0.40% 0.11% 8.58 10.31 - 78 Madagascar a 85.65% 81.93% 72.03% 70.17% 31.59% 36.79% 1.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35 89.60 - 131 Malawi a 84.03% 79.47% 79.95% 83.65% 36.36% 38.94% 8.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.07 45.66 - 61 Malaysia b 11.98% 3.82% 4.77% 5.19% 1.86% 0.11% 2.32% 0.85% 0.00% 0.05% 0.00% 0.01% 47.52 35.51 16 1,912 Maldives a 4.46% 1.16% 0.90% 1.01% 0.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.10% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02 0.14 - 16 Mali a 88.64% 69.13% 64.59% 61.53% 57.20% 1.62% 2.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.11 45.71 - 78 Malta b 0.00% 1.39% 3.93% 5.36% 0.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.96% 0.00% 3.77% 0.00% 0.37% 0.58 0.26 0 19 Marshall Islands a 0.00% 13.31% 12.02% 11.16% 11.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 0.19 - 2 Martinique a 2.13% 2.63% 2.43% 2.45% 0.31% 0.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.75% 0.00% 0.38% 0.14 0.30 - 18 Mauritania a 47.00% 34.00% 32.02% 32.16% 31.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.45 12.97 - 42 Mauritius b 47.07% 13.66% 10.63% 11.54% 0.65% 9.19% 1.21% 0.00% 0.03% 0.26% 0.00% 0.20% 2.27 1.59 - 33 Mayotte a 33.41% 9.96% 10.55% 10.24% 8.45% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.05 0.28 - 3 Mexico b 14.41% 9.36% 9.76% 9.22% 0.00% 6.15% 1.92% 0.00% 0.54% 0.20% 0.39% 0.01% 142.70 299.02 - 4,793 Micronesia (Federated States of) a 0.00% 1.50% 1.16% 1.20% 0.36% 0.66% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 0.02 - 2 Moldova b 1.14% 8.44% 13.05% 14.27% 12.21% 1.14% 0.86% 0.00% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0.05% 0.88 12.84 - 96 Monaco Mongolia b 1.89% 4.35% 3.27% 3.43% 2.08% 0.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.45% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.59 3.88 - 130 Montenegro b 0.00% 49.09% 45.99% 43.00% 23.35% 2.33% 17.29% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 4.79 7.12 - 28 Montserrat a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 1 Morocco b 19.48% 14.41% 11.72% 11.32% 4.04% 4.73% 1.09% 0.00% 1.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.42 52.94 - 604 Mozambique b 93.10% 91.30% 88.86% 86.40% 67.84% 8.96% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 41.84 334.86 - 436 Myanmar b 90.91% 84.40% 66.13% 61.53% 55.84% 1.80% 3.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 28.39 421.60 - 731 Namibia b 0.00% 26.37% 27.62% 26.47% 6.00% 1.65% 18.68% 0.00% 0.00% 0.15% 0.00% 0.00% 13.32 5.55 - 71 Nauru a 0.00% 0.08% 0.08% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 - - 0 Nepal b 95.12% 87.29% 84.37% 85.26% 78.91% 1.04% 2.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.42% 14.03 398.30 - 484 Netherlands b 1.20% 3.87% 5.66% 5.89% 0.00% 1.92% 0.02% 0.74% 1.40% 0.27% 0.13% 1.42% 46.19 48.73 12 1,823 New Caledonia a 10.16% 4.48% 3.98% 4.76% 0.01% 0.00% 3.60% 0.00% 0.65% 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 1.44 0.14 - 33 New Zealand b 30.03% 31.32% 30.32% 30.79% 0.00% 8.21% 14.75% 0.02% 1.42% 0.09% 6.11% 0.20% 112.84 50.31 0 530 Nicaragua b 68.77% 52.64% 51.84% 48.20% 36.46% 7.02% 0.76% 0.00% 2.23% 0.00% 1.74% 0.00% 6.12 43.92 - 104 Niger b 0.00% 80.71% 78.14% 78.94% 78.92% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03 89.80 - 114 Nigeria b 87.78% 86.78% 87.30% 86.64% 80.49% 5.81% 0.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.44 4,304.33 - 4,987 Niue a 0.57% 26.70% 23.14% 22.37% 0.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.80% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 0.02 - 0 Northern Mariana Islands a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 1 Norway b 59.17% 56.42% 57.20% 57.77% 0.00% 4.64% 50.54% 0.79% 0.92% 0.00% 0.00% 0.88% 389.70 40.89 6 756 Oman b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 754 Pakistan b 57.50% 46.72% 46.60% 46.48% 38.44% 4.80% 3.15% 0.00% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.57 1,345.67 - 3,112 Palau a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 2 Palestine (State of) a 22.08% 14.06% 10.53% 10.47% 6.01% 0.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.21% 0.00% 0.00% - 6.70 - 64 Panama b 43.59% 19.94% 19.77% 21.23% 4.87% 2.55% 12.91% 0.00% 0.86% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 20.08 10.64 - 145 Papua New Guinea a 71.70% 55.25% 52.55% 52.50% 43.53% 5.03% 2.78% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.15% 0.00% 4.55 56.19 - 116 Paraguay b 78.51% 64.25% 63.12% 61.68% 17.94% 22.60% 18.59% 2.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 38.08 83.10 5 205 Peru b 39.43% 30.80% 26.00% 25.50% 11.49% 1.08% 10.14% 2.25% 0.25% 0.24% 0.00% 0.04% 80.34 93.53 15 739 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Philippines b 50.95% 28.81% 28.58% 27.45% 13.42% 7.44% 2.15% 1.49% 0.19% 0.03% 2.74% 0.00% 62.05 249.51 17 1,195 Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Data Annex Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Poland b 2.50% 9.49% 11.57% 11.91% 0.00% 8.80% 0.20% 1.29% 1.20% 0.08% 0.04% 0.31% 63.52 206.10 33 2,538 Portugal b 26.94% 27.83% 30.46% 27.16% 0.00% 13.01% 4.45% 2.31% 5.97% 0.95% 0.12% 0.36% 78.40 77.73 14 625 Puerto Rico a 1.75% 0.57% 1.63% 1.84% 0.00% 0.00% 0.26% 0.00% 1.13% 0.44% 0.00% 0.00% 1.16 (0.00) - 63 Qatar b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 578 Reunion a 37.52% 16.45% 16.79% 17.49% 1.42% 7.32% 4.12% 0.00% 0.13% 4.16% 0.00% 0.33% 2.50 4.47 - 40 Romania b 3.36% 24.10% 24.33% 23.70% 13.82% 2.01% 4.37% 0.95% 1.86% 0.52% 0.11% 0.05% 61.58 141.72 8 894 Russian Federation b 3.75% 3.34% 3.42% 3.30% 0.28% 0.40% 2.61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 414.66 107.71 - 15,809 Rwanda a 80.09% 90.66% 88.18% 86.66% 78.45% 7.13% 1.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.86 68.07 - 80 Saint Helena a 15.07% 9.17% 8.74% 12.60% 5.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.05% 0.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 0.01 - 0 Samoa a 46.20% 46.75% 42.34% 34.32% 29.53% 1.73% 2.44% 0.00% 0.02% 0.61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.13 1.30 - 4 San Marino São Tomé and Principe a 50.93% 43.76% 41.81% 41.06% 40.03% 0.00% 1.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02 0.78 - 2 Saudi Arabia b 0.04% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 0.28 - 4,774 Senegal b 55.55% 50.26% 43.36% 42.71% 40.07% 1.71% 0.92% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 1.26 47.51 - 114 Serbia b 15.49% 20.60% 23.43% 21.17% 10.74% 2.39% 7.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.08% 0.05% 26.23 43.71 - 330 Seychelles a 4.25% 0.63% 1.30% 1.35% 0.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.51% 0.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03 0.03 - 4 Sierra Leone a 91.28% 84.18% 73.05% 77.66% 53.45% 23.77% 0.44% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.24 42.31 - 55 Singapore b 0.19% 0.48% 0.62% 0.71% 0.00% 0.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.05% 0.00% 0.49% 3.12 0.00 - 440 Slovak Republic a 2.23% 10.28% 12.24% 13.41% 0.00% 6.86% 3.38% 1.60% 0.01% 0.50% 0.04% 1.02% 19.90 24.59 6 377 Slovenia b 12.35% 19.50% 22.30% 20.88% 0.00% 12.21% 6.06% 0.64% 0.01% 0.67% 0.90% 0.38% 13.53 26.00 1 195 Solomon Islands a 59.01% 63.49% 62.99% 63.31% 63.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 3.21 - 5 Somalia a 87.20% 93.57% 94.43% 94.29% 60.51% 33.78% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 98.91 - 105 South Africa b 16.63% 17.08% 16.59% 17.15% 13.59% 2.88% 0.08% 0.00% 0.22% 0.38% 0.00% 0.00% 16.11 488.60 - 2,943 South Sudan b 0.00% 0.00% 29.83% 39.07% 36.56% 2.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 6.89 - 18 Spain b 10.54% 14.40% 17.35% 16.25% 0.00% 5.62% 2.68% 1.30% 4.70% 1.69% 0.02% 0.25% 292.00 181.21 40 3,159 Sri Lanka b 78.09% 61.84% 57.59% 52.88% 28.90% 19.08% 4.61% 0.00% 0.27% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 20.49 198.86 - 415 Saint Barthelemy a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - - St. Kitts and Nevis a 40.03% 0.99% 1.70% 1.64% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.27% 0.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03 0.00 - 2 St. Lucia a 5.47% 2.20% 2.15% 2.13% 2.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.08 - 4 Sint Maarten (Dutch part) a 0.00% 0.00% 0.05% 0.05% 0.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.00 - 8 St. Martin (French part) a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - - Saint Pierre and Miquelon a 0.00% 1.34% 1.14% 1.12% 0.74% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.38% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00 0.01 - 1 St. Vincent and the Grenadines a 15.44% 5.49% 5.80% 5.81% 2.32% 0.00% 3.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.08 0.06 - 2 Sudan b 73.27% 61.44% 62.44% 61.60% 36.88% 19.08% 5.64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 24.58 244.03 - 436 Suriname b 0.00% 24.54% 25.38% 24.91% 6.15% 1.76% 17.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.28 1.99 - 25 Swaziland a 85.25% 62.68% 67.69% 66.10% 15.32% 45.72% 5.06% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.80 21.72 - 36 Sweden b 34.06% 45.98% 49.69% 53.25% 0.00% 26.83% 16.38% 3.59% 3.54% 0.06% 0.00% 2.85% 284.41 347.32 48 1,277 Switzerland b 17.12% 21.46% 23.42% 25.29% 0.00% 4.90% 15.71% 0.24% 0.05% 0.76% 1.86% 1.76% 130.43 63.05 2 772 Syrian Arab Republic b 2.36% 1.41% 2.35% 0.52% 0.00% 0.09% 0.43% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.08 0.22 - 249 Tajikistan b 29.64% 61.83% 45.76% 44.66% 0.00% 0.00% 44.66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 44.13 (0.00) - 99 Tanzania a 94.78% 90.32% 86.67% 85.71% 65.95% 19.08% 0.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 6.46 798.08 - 939 Thailand b 33.64% 22.65% 24.10% 22.86% 8.50% 10.50% 0.53% 2.03% 0.04% 0.27% 0.00% 0.99% 53.76 604.11 64 3,158 Timor-Leste a 0.00% 34.69% 18.42% 18.22% 18.22% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.89 - 5 125 126 Share in total final energy consumption (%) Total final Final use of renewable energy Solid biofuels energy (petajoules) Country consumption Traditional Modern Liquid Other (Biogas, renewable (petajoules) Renewable Energy Hydro Wind Solar Geothermal Electricity Heat Transport use use Biofuels waste, marine) 1990 2010 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Togo b 78.70% 65.83% 72.16% 71.26% 58.55% 9.45% 3.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.28 62.68 - 93 Tokelau Tonga a 1.49% 1.01% 1.70% 1.88% 1.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 0.01 - 1 Trinidad and Tobago b 1.19% 0.33% 0.28% 0.28% 0.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.49 - 172 Tunisia b 14.48% 12.69% 12.93% 12.56% 11.29% 0.16% 0.06% 0.00% 0.40% 0.65% 0.00% 0.00% 1.58 38.41 - 318 Turkey b 24.51% 14.33% 11.61% 13.37% 0.00% 3.26% 5.47% 0.12% 0.95% 0.97% 2.46% 0.15% 247.17 233.73 5 3,630 Turkmenistan b 0.28% 0.07% 0.04% 0.04% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.31 - 753 Turks and Caicos Islands a 1.79% 0.52% 0.58% 0.57% 0.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.01 - 1 Tuvalu a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01 (0.01) - 0 Uganda a 96.02% 91.61% 90.22% 89.06% 70.33% 16.97% 1.77% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.34 461.67 - 529 United Kingdom b 0.65% 3.64% 7.40% 8.71% 0.00% 3.48% 0.41% 0.79% 2.65% 0.54% 0.00% 0.83% 270.87 119.23 39 4,926 Ukraine b 0.65% 2.88% 3.50% 4.14% 2.31% 0.82% 0.72% 0.07% 0.14% 0.06% 0.00% 0.02% 18.77 62.25 1 1,989 United Arab Emirates b 0.00% 0.11% 0.15% 0.14% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.93 1.94 - 2,093 Uruguay b 44.81% 52.82% 55.39% 58.02% 6.64% 34.09% 12.38% 1.75% 3.09% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00% 33.61 70.54 3 184 United States Virgin Islands a 0.00% 0.00% 2.76% 3.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.09 - - 2 United States a 4.18% 7.51% 8.75% 8.72% 0.00% 3.24% 1.36% 2.41% 1.05% 0.36% 0.12% 0.18% 1,800.87 1,910.77 1,386 58,483 Uzbekistan b 1.33% 2.64% 2.90% 2.97% 0.00% 0.01% 2.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 34.56 0.17 - 1,169 Vanuatu a 24.16% 38.38% 32.14% 36.11% 33.54% 0.00% 0.95% 0.73% 0.75% 0.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04 0.83 - 2 Venezuela b 11.98% 11.44% 12.32% 12.84% 0.61% 1.42% 10.81% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 164.58 30.89 - 1,522 Vietnam b 76.08% 34.80% 37.04% 35.00% 21.70% 5.01% 8.27% 0.00% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 189.78 610.41 - 2,286 Wallis and Futuna Islands a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - 0 Western Sahara a 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - - - - Yemen b 2.15% 0.96% 0.97% 2.28% 0.00% 2.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% - 2.43 - 107 Zambia b 82.98% 92.10% 88.03% 87.99% 56.73% 19.60% 11.66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 39.99 261.69 - 343 Zimbabwe b 63.98% 82.88% 81.05% 81.80% 72.77% 5.53% 3.21% 0.29% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.05 310.22 1 397 World c 16.65% 16.67% 17.30% 17.46% 7.88% 3.67% 3.26% 0.91% 0.70% 0.56% 0.18% 0.29% 16,595.98 42,690.54 3,182 357,871 High Income c 6% 10% 11% 11% 0.06% 4.41% 2.75% 1.51% 1.19% 0.60% 0.16% 0.49% 7,376 6,439 2,081 142,272 Low Income c 69% 81% 82% 82% 69.44% 9.85% 2.62% 0.02% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 200 5,961 1 7,505 Lower Middle Income c 45% 40% 40% 40% 31.02% 5.77% 2.14% 0.15% 0.27% 0.09% 0.16% 0.01% 1,490 19,814 76 53,983 Upper Middle Income c 19% 14% 13% 13% 3.84% 2.36% 4.42% 0.75% 0.53% 0.83% 0.24% 0.26% 7,380 9,799 1,016 137,623 Central Asia and Southern Asia c 39.06% 30.03% 28.57% 28.38% 21.01% 5.03% 1.83% 0.04% 0.31% 0.11% 0.00% 0.04% 885.99 9,849.93 16.05 37,890.91 Eastern Asia and South-eastern Asia c 27.49% 14.02% 13.98% 14.09% 6.49% 1.29% 3.79% 0.23% 0.55% 1.11% 0.28% 0.35% 5,378.17 9,384.93 242.21 106,515.63 Latin America and Caribbean c 32.64% 28.48% 27.20% 27.73% 4.41% 10.76% 8.14% 3.56% 0.51% 0.20% 0.13% 0.02% 2,381.48 3,372.55 832.75 23,757.27 Northern America and Europe c 5.79% 10.08% 11.68% 11.87% 0.35% 4.40% 3.06% 1.64% 1.26% 0.50% 0.14% 0.50% 7,006.59 6,253.05 2,066.72 129,134.81 Oceania c 13.37% 12.83% 13.57% 13.51% 1.41% 5.72% 3.15% 0.26% 1.07% 0.85% 0.85% 0.20% 220.91 305.16 10.42 3,972.40 Sub-Saharan Africa c 71.04% 71.26% 70.14% 69.98% 60.05% 7.97% 1.76% 0.01% 0.05% 0.07% 0.07% 0.00% 321.30 12,184.62 1.39 17,907.79 Western Asia and Northern Africa c 9.30% 6.20% 5.05% 5.42% 1.45% 1.35% 1.54% 0.02% 0.24% 0.35% 0.44% 0.03% 377.82 731.32 4.93 20,550.68 a. Source: Energy Balances, UN Statistics Division (2017) b. Source: World Energy Balances, IEA (2017) c. Sources: World Bank analysis based on World Energy Statistics and Balances, IEA (2017); Energy Balances, UN Statistics Division (2017) Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 Data Annex 127 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ANNEX 2 • SHEDDING LIGHT ON ELECTRIFICATION DATA: TRENDS AND PATTERNS OF ELECTRIFICATION For 20 countries with the largest electricity access deficit, we undertook a triangulation exercise to bring together complementary sources of data on electrification so as to improve the understanding of electrification trends. The exercise entailed collection and comparative analysis of government-reported access rates, household survey–reported, utility-reported data, and industry data on solar panel sales and their estimated impact on electrification. Further, using a range of historic surveys that bring together data on electrification and socioeconomic characteristics, household survey data from these countries were disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups—by household consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) and by gender of the head of household. Because of the limited availability of surveys that support full analysis of household poverty level, our analysis may not be based on the most recent surveys that are used to report on overall electrification trends in this report. BANGLADESH Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) HIES 2016 70 MICS 60 HIES DHS DHS MICS Datasets 50 HIES DHS 40 DHS 1999–2000 DHS 30 DHS 1996–97 20 DHS 1993–94 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Utility data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, Annual reports of Bangladesh Utilities, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI 128 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Aggregated from DESCI, DPDC, – No government report available 57.1 REB and WZDPDC annual report, 2016 75.9 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on HIES 2016 – Utility – Informal World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Power Solar (Tier 1 and above): IDCOL Annual report, 75 Development Board, 2015 (grid connections) 11.6 2016 and IDCOL, 2016 Bangladesh’s latest household survey (HIES, 2016) reported that 75.9% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 94% in urban areas to 69% in rural areas. At the same time, Bangladesh’s utilities reported a total of 20.7 million household connections. On the basis of the connections reported and an average household size of 4.5, the grid connection rate is estimated at 57.1%. Grid connections have been rising steeply in recent years, with the Rural Electrification Board adding, on average, 3.5 million new rural connections annually since 2015, with a view to meeting the country’s goal of universal access by 2021. The gap of 18.8% between the electrification rate reported by the HIES and the grid connection rate can be partially explained by the rapid development of off-grid solar solutions, mainly through Infrastructure Development Company Limited (IDCOL). According to IDCOL, 11.6% of the population relied on solar home systems, providing service at Tier 1 and above, in 2016. The utility connection rate and the off-grid access rate together account for 68.7% of the total electricity access rate, leaving a gap of 7.2% compared to HIES results. Informal connections and other forms of self-supply like diesel generators or rechargeable batteries could explain the difference. Assuming Bangladesh’s average household consumption is 671.3 kWh/year, even an illustrative 1% of nontechnical loss from informal connections would provide access to 0.82% of the population. Patterns of electrification Household survey data can also be disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups. In Bangladesh, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a steady increase in electrification as overall household welfare rises. Access rates improve by more than three times from the bottom quintile to the top quintile, rising by about 14 percentage points from one quintile to the next. Compared to other large access deficit countries in developing Asia, where the top quintile has 1.6 times the access rate of the bottom quintile, disparity in access by consumption quintiles is more pronounced in Bangladesh. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have higher levels of access compared to female-headed households by about five percentage points, whereas other large access deficit countries in Asia have gender parity in this respect. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Bangladesh to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% 85 Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 69 80% 70% 57 57 52 60% 60% 50% 43 40% 40% 27 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SAR]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 129 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 BURKINA FASO Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 MIS 20 MICS DHS DHS 10 DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 SONABEL data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, SONABEL reports, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) – No government report available 17.7 Utility – Formal: SONABEL report, 2015 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 19.2 – Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Ministere 20.3 0.1 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 de l'Energie, Burkino Faso, 2015 Burkina Faso’s latest household survey (MIS, 2014) reported that 19.2% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 58% in urban areas to 3% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 19.2% by 2016. In parallel, the latest utility report from SONABEL reported 0.55 million of household connections in 2015. On the basis of the connections reported and a household size of 5.9, the grid connection rate is estimated at 17.7%. The gap of two percentage points between electrification rates estimated from household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility can scarcely be explained by the development of off-grid solar solutions because—according to IRENA—only 0.1% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above services in 2016. Informal connections and other forms of self-supply like diesel generators or rechargeable batteries could potentially explain the remaining gap. 130 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregated patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups in Burkina Faso show stark differences in access rates across consumption quintiles. There is a striking increase in electrification as overall household welfare rises, with access rates improving by more than 38 times from the bottom quintile to the top quintile. Electricity access is seen to double from one quintile to the next in the bottom three quintiles, and almost quadruples from the fourth quintile to the fifth. Disparity in access across consumption quintiles in Burkina Faso is greater than that of other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, where the access rate of the top quintile is about 6.5 times that of the bottom quintile. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that female-headed households have similar levels of access as male-headed households in Burkina Faso, which is typical of the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Overall, household consumption, not gender, drives access disparity in Burkina Faso. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2009 household head, 2009 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 39 40% 30% 20% 20% 12 12 11 10% 5 1 2 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 131 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 CHAD Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 20 DHS DHS MICS DHS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 STEE/SNE data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, SNE, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Government report based on Ministry of 6.4 2.8 Utility – Formal: SNE, 2015 Energy, 2017 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 8.8 3.6 Utility – Informal: SNE, 2016 estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on DHS 8.8 0.01 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 survey 2014/15 Chad's latest household survey (DHS 2014–15) reported that 7.7% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 32.4% in urban areas to 0.7% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 8.8% by 2016. In parallel, the latest utility report from SNE reported 0.67 million household connections for 2015. On the basis of the connections reported and a household size of 5.8, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 2.8%. Meanwhile, the utility estimated nontechnical losses at 27%. Assuming Chad's average household consumption is 448 kWh/year, an estimated additional population of 3.6% may be obtaining grid electricity through informal connections. Overall, the (formal and informal) utility connection rate would then account for 6.4% of the population in 2016, leaving a gap of 2.4% compared to household survey’s results. Because—according to IRENA—only 0.01% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above services in 2016, the bulk of the difference is likely accounted for by other forms of self-supply like diesel generators or rechargeable batteries. 132 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregating household survey data by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) to identify patterns of electricity access in Chad shows significant increase in electrification as overall household welfare rises. Access rates improve by more than 21 times from the bottom quintile to the top quintile, doubling from one quintile to the next. Disparity in access across consumption quintiles is more pronounced in Chad compared to other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have higher levels of access compared to female-headed households, and outperform by about three percentage points; which is relatively unusual compared to other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Chad to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2011 household head, 2011 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 21 20% 20% 9 10% 10 6 1 2 5 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 133 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 CONGO, (DEM, REP, OF) Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 20 Enquete 1-2-3, DHS Enquete 1-2-3 DHS 2013–14 MICs 2001 2012 report 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 SNEL data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, SNEL, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Societe Nationale d’Electricite – No government report available 5.2 – SNEL, 2017 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 17.1 – Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on SNEL, 15.2 0 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 2016 The latest household survey (DHS 2013–14) in the Democratic Republic of Congo reported that 13.5% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 42% in urban areas to 0.4% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 17.1% by 2016. The national utility SNEL reported 0.8 million household connections in 2017. On the basis of the connections reported and a household size of 5.3, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 5.2%, leaving a gap of 11.9% compared to household survey results, which can be explained in a number of ways. First, the utility SNEL has limited capacity to record and track actual grid connections. Second, given DRC’s vast territory, small scale independent operators are also providing service in provincial centers. Third, informal connections and other forms of self-supply like diesel generators or rechargeable batteries could potentially also explain the gap. Assuming an average household consumption of 1304 kWh/year, an illustrative calculation of 1% of nontechnical loss would mean that 0.15% of population had electricity access through informal connections in 2016. According to IRENA’s statistics, there are no reported sales of solar panels capable of providing Tier 1 service or above. 134 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification In the Democratic Republic of Congo, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a massive increase in electrification as overall household welfare rises. Access rates improve by more than 60 times from the bottom quintile to the top quintile, a steeper gradient than that found in most other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Access rates in the lowest quintile barely register, and triple from one quintile to the next. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have higher levels of access compared to female-headed households, and outperform by 1.7 percentage points. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in the Democratic Republic of Congo to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2012 household head, 2012 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 36 40% 30% 20% 20% 11 9 11 10% 4 1 2 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 135 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ETHIOPIA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 Socio-economic Survey 40 DHS MTF 30 ESS 20 DHS 10 DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 EEU data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, EEU, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: estimated by Ethiopian Government Report: National Electrification 10.5 33 Electric Utility - EEU, 2017 Program, 2017 0.5 Utility – Informal: estimated by EEU, 2017 42 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on MTF, 2017 29 Utility - Total: MTF (tier 1 and above), 2017 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on National 33 Electrification Program, Implementation Road 13 Solar: MTF (tier 1 above), 2017 Map and Financing Prospectus, 2017 Ethiopia’s latest household survey (MTF, 2017) reported that 42% of the population has access to electricity above Tier 1, ranging from 96.5% in urban areas to 27.7% in rural areas. In parallel, the utility EEU reported 2.4 million household connections in 2017. On the basis of the connections reported and a household size of 4.6, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 10.5%. Furthermore, the utility estimated nontechnical losses of 1.2% representing informal connections to the grid. Assuming Ethiopia's average household consumption is 444 kWh/year, an estimated additional 0.5% of the population may be obtaining grid electricity through such informal connections. However, the MTF survey reported a much higher rate of grid connection for 2017, at 29%. The gap between grid access rates from the utility and from the MTF survey can be explained by the fact that in Ethiopia—because of relatively high connection charges—many households share a single metered connection and divide the utility bill among themselves (Kojima and Trimble 2016). This phenomenon is captured by MTF and results in a much higher grid connection rate of 29.0%. According to MTF, the difference between the utility connection rate of 29.0% and the overall access rate of 42.0% is explained by the fact that 13% of the population relies on solar home systems and solar lighting systems that provide service at Tiers 1 and 2. 136 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification In Ethiopia, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a steady increase in electrification as overall household welfare rises, although the disparity between rich and poor is smaller than what is found in the largest access deficit countries of Sub-Saharan African. Access rates improve by close to 40% from the bottom quintile to the top quintile, rising by 5 percentage points in the bottom three quintiles, and 10 percentage points in the top two quintiles. Gender-disaggregated access rates reveal a notable characteristic: female-headed households have higher levels of access when compared to male-headed households, and outperform by about 6.5 percentage points. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Ethiopia to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 72 80% 70% 62 60 60% 53 60% 54 50% 44 48 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 137 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 INDIA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 NSS 68th NFHS 90 NSS 65th NSS 66th round 80 round Electrification rate (%) round NSS DHS 70 WHS National Family NFHS 60 Health Survey (NFHS) Census 50 Census 40 30 20 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Utility data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018,, Saubhagya Dashboard, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Saubhagya Dashboard, Oct. Government report: Saubhagya Dashboard, 80.3 80.3 2017 Oct. 2017 – Utility – Informal Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model Solar (home lighting systems): MNRE, 84.5 0.4 estimate, 2016 2015-2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: Urban: based on Power for All agreements for states; Rural: 82 0.25 Solar (Tier1 and above): IRENA, 2016 GARV (31 Dec 2016). Includes population with access to SHS (around 1 million) The rapid growth of electricity access in India is propelled by the country’s $2.5 billion electrification program to reach universal electrification by December 2018. India’s latest household survey (NFHS, 2015) reported that 88% of its population has access to electricity, ranging from 97.5% in urban areas to 83.2% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on the full series of historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 84.5% for 2016. In parallel, the utilities combined reported 145.1 million of household connections in 2017. On the basis of the connections reported and a household size of 4.8, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 80.3%. The gap in electrification rates reported by household surveys, and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility, may be due to a number of factors. First, there are no official statistics on nontechnical losses, so the exact extent of informality is unknown. An illustrative calculation simulating the impact of 1% nontechnical losses, on the basis of India’s average household consumption of 1144 kWh/year, suggest that this level of losses could provide informal access to 1.05% of population. Second, households in rural areas can use a variety of non- grid-based solutions, including solar electricity, diesel generation, or rechargeable batteries. Of these options, solar electricity is the only one for which official statistics are available from two sources, both of which give 138 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification quite consistent results. First, India’s Ministry of New and Renewable Energy reported 1.29 million solar home lighting systems in 2016, which translates to 0.4% of population. Second, according to IRENA’s global database, 0.25% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. Patterns of electrification Disaggregated household survey data by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) in India shows a steady improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 1.5 times that of the bottom quintile, in line with the average for the largest access deficit countries in Asia. Access rates are seen to increase by 16 percentage points from the bottom quintile to the second quintile and by about 5 percentage points after that. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that female-headed households have similar levels of access when compared to male-headed households, which is also typical of the largest access deficit countries in Asia. Overall, household consumption, not gender, drives access disparity in India. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2011 household head, 2011 100% 94 97 100% 89 Share of Households (%) 85 86 Share of Households (%) 90% 82 80% 80% 70% 66 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SAR]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 139 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 KENYA Electrification trends
Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 MISKIHBS 40 30 DHS DHS 20 DHS M IS DHS DHS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 KPLC data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, KPLC, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Kenya Power (KPLC Annual Government Report: based on KPLC Annual 40.4 70.3 Report, 2016 report, 2016-2017¹ – Utility – Informal Tracking SDG 7 report: based on KIHBS 56 41.4 Utility - Total: KIHBS 2015-2016 2015-2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Grid 1.6 Solar (Tier1 and above): IRENA, 2016 connections reported by Kenya Power, 2016. 64.5 Includes 2% access rate from SHS based on sales 14.1 Solar: KIHBS 2015-2016 1 Kenya’s latest household survey (KIHBS, 2015-16) reported that 56% of its population has access to electricity, ranging from 78% in urban areas to 16% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on the full series of historical progress, suggest that the access rate should have reached around 35.4% for 2016. In parallel, the utility KPLC reported 4.9 million of household connections in 2016. Based on the connections reported and a household size of 4, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 40.4%. There are no official statistics on non-technical losses that reflect the presence of informal connections. An illustrative simulation of 1% nontechnical losses, given Kenya’s average household consumption of 539 KWh/year, could potentially provide informal access to 0.55% of the population. The grid connection rate from the utility is aligned with the findings from the latest household survey, which reported that 41.4% of the population obtain electricity through grid connections. The gap in electrification rates reported by household surveys, and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility, can be partially explained by the use of a variety of off-grid solutions, including diesel generators, rechargeable batteries and solar systems. Statistics are only available regarding penetration of solar systems. According to 1 The government reported electrification rate is based on the 6.06 million utility connections as of September 30th, 2017. These numbers are converted into an access rate using a household size of 5.5 and a population estimate of 46.9 million. These diverge from the household size of 3.6 reported in the most recent DHS survey, and the population of 49.7 million in the World Development Indicators. These differences account for the divergence in the overall electrification rate. 140 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification the household survey, 14.1% of the population relied on off-grid solar power, and IRENA reported 1.6% of the population of Kenya relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016.. Patterns of electrification Using household survey data to identify patterns of electricity access across different socio-economic groups in Kenya shows that there is substantial increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. Access rates in the top quintile is 40 percentage points higher than that in the bottom quintile, with over 30 percentage point jump from the fourth quintile to the fifth. The disparity in the top quintiles that is seen in Kenya is more pronounced than the average for the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Gender-disaggregated access show that male-headed households have higher levels of access when compared to female-headed households, and outperform by two percentage points, departing from the gender parity in access seen in other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Kenya to a farther extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of 100% household welfare, 2005 100% household head, 2005 Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 43 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 13 12 10 10% 4 0 1 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 141 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 MADAGASCAR Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 Enquête Permanente EBSRSE 2003–04 MIS 20 auprè de Méages DHS DHS DHS MIS MIS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 JIRAMA data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, JIRAMA, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Government Report: based on National 15 8.2 Utility – JIRAMA, 2016 Electrification Strategy, Energy Ministry, 2014 22.9 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on MTF, 2017 – Utility – Informal World Energy Outlook 2017: based on National 22.9 Electrification Program, Implementation Road 0.03 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Map and Financing Prospectus, 2017 Madagascar’s latest household survey (MIS, 2016) reported that 22.9% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 67.3% in urban areas to 17.3% in rural areas. In parallel, the utility JIRAMA reported 0.5 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.2, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 8.2%. The substantial gap in electrification rates reported by household surveys, and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility, could be due to a variety of causes, including informal connections to the utility as well as off-grid supply from diesel generators, rechargeable batteries, or solar systems. Available data from IRENA suggest that the penetration of solar is negligible, with only 0.03% of the population relying on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 access and above in 2016. A more comprehensive off-grid market analysis is being conducted nationally and results are expected in Spring 2018. 142 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Household survey data can also be disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups. In Madagascar, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a striking increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 52 percentage points higher than that of the bottom quintile (the average difference between top and bottom quintiles for the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa is 37 percentage points), and doubles from one quintile to the next in the bottom three quintiles, and triples in the next two quintiles. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have similar levels of access as female-headed households. Overall, household consumption, not gender, drives access disparity in Madagascar. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 54 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 19 20% 17 17 10% 3 7 0% 1 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 143 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 MALAWI Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 20 NIHS 2015–16 WHS DHS MICS DHS HIS-3 MIS IHPS MIS DHS 10 DHS DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 ESCOM data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, ESCOM, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) - No government report available 9.3 Utility – Formal: ESCOM, 2016 11 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on DHS 2015-16 – Utility – Informal World Energy Outlook 2017: based on DHS 11.3 0 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 survey, 2016 with off-grid estimates Malawi’s latest household survey (DHS, 2015–16) reported that 11% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 42% in urban areas to 4% in rural areas. In parallel, the utility ESCOM reported 0.37 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.5, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 9.3%. There are no official data on nontechnical losses to gauge the extent of informal connections. An illustrative simulation of 1% nontechnical losses, given Malawi’s average household consumption is 1224 kWh/year, could potentially provide informal access to 0.27% of the population in 2016. The relatively small gap between the utility connection rate and the access recorded by the household survey could be attributable to off-grid solutions, such as diesel generators and rechargeable batteries. According to IRENA, none of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, or solar lighting systems capable of providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 144 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregated household survey data reveal patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups in Malawi. Access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows material increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 28 percentage points higher than that of the bottom quintile, and 23 percentage points higher than the fourth quintile, with only marginal improvements in access rates from one quintile to the next in the bottom four quintiles, and a massive sevenfold jump in access rates between quintiles four and five. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have higher levels of access compared to female-headed households by 1.3 percentage points. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Malawi to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 29 20% 20% 10% 6 7 1 1 1 4 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 145 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 MALI Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 MIS 40 EDSMV 30 MICS DHS 20 DHS 10 DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 EDM data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, EDM, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Government Report: based on SPC indicator 39 23 Utility – Formal: Electricite Du Mali - EDM, 2016 statistic, 2016 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 35.1 – Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 40.5 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on MIS 2015 0.6 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Mali’s latest household survey (MIS, 2015) reported that 37.6% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 83.1% in urban areas to 23.4% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on the full series of historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 35.1% for 2016. In parallel, the utility EDM reported 0.46 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 9, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 23%. The substantial gap between electrification rates reported by household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility could have various causes, including informal connections to the utility, as well as off-grid supply from diesel generators, rechargeable batteries, or solar systems. According to IRENA, only 0.6% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, or solar lighting systems capable of providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 146 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups in Mali that can be extracted from household survey data show a material increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 50 percentage points higher than that of the bottom quintile, and 33 percentage points higher than the fourth quintile, with only marginal improvements in access rates from one quintile to the next in the bottom four quintiles, and a jump in access rates of over 2.5 times between quintiles four and five. Gender- disaggregated access rates show that female-headed households have higher levels of access compared to male-headed households by 1.7 percentage points. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Mali to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 53 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 19 20 20% 20% 18 10% 10 3 5 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 147 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 MOZAMBIQUE Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 AIS DHS 20 MICS AIS DHS QIBB DHS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 EDM data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, EDM, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Government Report; based on Electricidade 25.8 23.1 Utility – Formal: EDM, 2016 de Moçambique (EDM) statistics, 2016 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 24.2 - Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Directorate of Studies and Planning, Ministry 28.6 1.5 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 of Energy based on grid connections and off- grid access, 2016 Mozambique’s latest household survey (AIS, 2015) reported that 24% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 68% in urban areas to 5% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on the full series of historical progress, suggest that the access rate should have reached about 24.2% for 2016. In parallel, the utility EDM reported 1.51 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.4, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 23.1%. The utility does not report nontechnical losses from which the extent of informal connections could be gauged. An illustrative simulation based on 1% nontechnical losses indicates that, with average household consumption of 1224 kWh/year, informal connections would only supply about 0.03% of the population in 2016. The substantial gap between electrification rates reported by household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility could be explained by off-grid solutions such as diesel generators, rechargeable batteries, and solar systems. According to household surveys (IOF, 2014/15), 1.5% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2015. In addition, 2.1% of population relied on rechargeable batteries (below Tier 1) in 2015. 148 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups through disaggregated household survey data shows a striking increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 13 times that of the bottom quintile (the average for the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa is a jump of 6.5 times from the bottom quintile to the top quintile), and doubles from one quintile to the next. Notably, gender-disaggregated access rates show that male-headed households have higher levels of access compared to female-headed households by 1 percentage point. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Mozambique to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2008 household head, 2008 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 47 40% 40% 30% 20% 21 20% 18 17 10% 11 3 6 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 149 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 MYANMAR Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 MPLCS 2015 60 IHLCA-2 2009–10 50 WHS Census 40 30 20 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Utility data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, Utility Statistics book, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Utility Statistic book, 20016 32.6 – No government report available (not public) – Utility – Informal Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 57 17.4 Solar (Solar home systems): MPLCS 2015 estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on DHS 58.8 10.6 Mini-grids: MPLCS 2015 2015-2016, includes off-grid estimates Myanmar’s latest household survey (MPLC, 2015) reported that 60.5% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 90.8% in urban areas to 48.9% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest that the access rate should have reached about 57% by 2016. In parallel, all utilities combined reported 3.1 million connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 5, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 32.6%. The substantial gap between electrification rates reported by household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility can be partially explained by the rapid development of off-grid solutions. According to the household survey (MPLC, 2015), 28% of the population relied on solar home systems and mini-grids. Overall, the utility connection rate and the off-grid access rate together reported 60.6% of total electricity access, which aligns with household survey's results. 150 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Household survey data can also be disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups. In Myanmar, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a steady improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 1.6 times that of the bottom quintile, and the access rates of the middle three quintiles differ by about 7 percentage points. The disparity in access rates across consumption quintiles is less pronounced in Myanmar and in line with the average for the largest access deficit Asian countries. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for male-headed households are marginally higher compared to female-headed households by 1.5 percentage points, which is a departure from the gender parity in access rates seen in the largest access deficit countries in Asia. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2015 household head, 2015 100% 95 100% 87 Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 81 80% 80% 78 79 73 70% 60% 60 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([EAP]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 151 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 NIGER Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 20 ENISED 2015 IE-Banerjee ENISED DHS DHS MICS HIES DHS 10 DHS EPCES 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 NIGELEC data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, NIGELEC, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Government Report: based on Ministère de 11.7 9.2 Utility – Formal: NIGELEC, 2016 l'Energie, République du Niger, 2016 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 16.2 - Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Ministère 11.2 de l'Energie, Direction de l'Electricité 0.003 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Nucléaire , 2016 Niger’s latest household survey (ENISED, 2015) reported that 16.6% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 60.2% in urban areas to 7.1% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 16.2% by 2016. In parallel, the utility NIGELEC reported 0.32 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 5.9, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 9.21%. There are no official statistics for nontechnical losses from which the extent of informal connections could be gauged. An illustrative simulation based on 1% nontechnical losses and average household consumption of 1,210 kWh/year in 2016 suggests that this could provide informal access to 0.19% of the population. The substantial gap between electrification rates reported by household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility can be explained by reliance on off-grid solutions, such as diesel generators, rechargeable batteries, and solar systems. However, according to IRENA, the penetration of solar electricity in Niger is negligible with only 0.003% of the population relying on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 152 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregated household survey data is not available for Niger within the Global Poverty Working Group Database (GPWG-DB), World Bank. 153 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 NIGERIA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 LSMS 60 LSMS DHS DHS DHS MICS 50 DHS MIS 40 MIS 30 20 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Power Holding Company of Nigeria data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, NERC, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: KPI data collected by NERC, 19.4 2016 – No government report available Utility – Informal: KPI data collected by NERC, 7.1 2016 59.3 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on LSMS, 2016 0.1 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on GHS 60.6 5.2 Self-generation: LSMS, 2016 Panel Survey Report, 2015 Nigeria’s latest household survey (LSMS, 2016) reported that 59.3% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 86% in urban areas to 41.1% in rural areas. In parallel, the aggregated connections across all distribution utilities amounted to 7.7 million household connections in 2017. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.9, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 19.4%. The government also reported an estimated 11.1% of nontechnical losses relating to informal connections. Assuming Nigeria's average household consumption is 740.6 kWh/year, it is estimated that an additional 7.1% of population may be obtaining grid electricity through informal connections. Even considering both formal and informal connections together at 26.5%, there remains a substantial gap with the electrification rates reported by household surveys at 59.3%. This is attributable to a variety of factors, including self-supply through diesel generation, which according to the household survey provides access to a further 5.2% of the population. However, off-grid solar systems do not appear to provide much of an explanation for this divergence, since according to IRENA, only 0.1% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems in 2016. 154 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Household survey data disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups in Nigeria show a steady improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 2.5 times that of the bottom quintile, and the access rates of the middle three quintiles differ by about 6 percentage points, indicating a lower degree of disparity in access rates across consumption quintiles than is seen in the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Notably, gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for female-headed households are higher compared to male-headed households by 5.5 percentage points, compared to a more equal distribution in the largest access deficit countries in Sub- Saharan Africa. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Nigeria to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2009 household head, 2009 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 38 40% 31 31 30% 26 25 20% 15 19 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 155 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 PAKISTAN Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 PSLM 2008–09 PSLM 2010–11 DHS 90 PSLM 2004–05 DHS PSLM 2014–15 80 HIES Electrification rate (%) Census 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 NERPA data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, NERPA, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: NEPRA State of Industry 74 Government Report based on Census 2017 82.4 Report, 2016 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 99 1.7 Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: Grid connections: based on Power System Statistics 2016, 73.6 National Transmission and Dispatch 0 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Company. Off-grid: based on Alternate Energy Development Board (AEDB), Islamabad Pakistan’s latest household survey (PSLM, 2014–15) reported that 93.5% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 98.7% in urban areas to 90.4% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest that the access rate should have reached about 99% by 2016. In parallel, the regulator NERPA reported aggregated connections across all distribution utilities at 25.6 million in 2016. On the basis of the number of connections and a household size of 6.2, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 82.4%. Meanwhile, the regulator reports nontechnical losses of 1.58%. Using Pakistan's average household consumption of 1,628.7 kWh/year, it is estimated that an additional 1.7% of population may be obtaining grid electricity through informal connections, notably through shared metered connections. The small remaining margin between formal and informal utility coverage at 92.1% and access rates of 93.5% reported in the household survey could be attributable to off-grid options such as diesel generation and rechargeable batteries. According to IRENA, in Pakistan, none of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, or solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 156 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregated household survey data by socio-economic groups in Pakistan shows that there is a steady improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The difference in access rate of 1.2 times between the top quintile and the bottom quintile, is lower than the average of 1.6 times difference for the largest access deficit countries in Asia. The access rates of the middle three quintiles differ by about 3 percentage points. Notably, gender-disaggregated access show that access rates for female-headed households are higher compared to male-headed households by over 2 percentage points, which is not typical of the largest access deficit countries in Asia. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Pakistan to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2013 household head, 2013 100% 93 96 100% 90 91 89 87 Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SAR]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 157 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 PHILIPPINES Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 DHS MIS 2015 90 DHS 80 DHS Electrification rate (%) DHS MICS 70 DHS 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) – No government report available – Utility – Formal Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 91 – Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on 89.6 0 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Department of Energy Philippines, 2015 The Philippines’ latest household survey (World Bank Poverty Global Practice, 2015) reported that 89.1% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 95.9% in urban areas to 85.1% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 91% by 2016. Information on utility connections is highly disaggregated because the country’s power system is unbundled, with more than 100 DISCOs and cooperatives. According to IRENA, no population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, or solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 158 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification In the Philippines, disaggregating household survey data on access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows an improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 1.4 times the access rate of the bottom quintile, with the access rate increasing by 14 percentage points from the bottom quintile to the second quintile. These trends are in line with those seen in the largest access deficit countries in Asia. Notably, gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for female- headed households are higher than for male-headed households by over 1 percentage point. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Philippines to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2015 household head, 2015 96 99 100% 92 100% 84 89 88 Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([EAP]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 159 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 SUDAN Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 MICS 40 30 National Baseline Survey (NBS) 20 MICS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) 42.6 Government Report: GoS 2017 - Utility – Formal Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 38.5 - Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on MICS 46.2 - Solar (2014) with off-grid estimates Sudan’s latest household survey (MICS, 2014) reported that 44.9% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 76.3% in urban areas to 31.7% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest the access rate should have reached about 38.5% by 2016. No data is available from the utility or on the development of solar off-grid in the country. 160 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Household survey data can also be disaggregated to identify patterns of electricity access across different socioeconomic groups. In Sudan, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a steady improvement in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 6 times that of the bottom quintile, and the access rates of the middle three quintiles differ by about 11 percentage points. These trends are in line with the average of the largest access deficit. Particularly, gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for male-headed households are higher compared to female-headed households by 12 percentage points, significantly different from the gender parity in access seen in Sub-Sahara Africa. Overall, household consumption as well as gender could be driving access disparity in Sudan. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2009 household head, 2009 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 63 60% 60% 50% 48 40% 37 40% 38 30% 26 26 20% 20% 10% 10 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 161 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 TANZANIA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 Energy Access 40 Situation Report 30 AIS 2007–08 Survey-3 AIS 20 NPS-3 NPS-3 MIS 2015 AIS 2003–04 DHS National Panel DHS DHS DHS 10 DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 TANSECO data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, EWURA annual reports, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Energy and Water Utility 15.4 Regulatory Authority (EWURA) annual report, Government Report: Tanzania Energy Access 2016 33 Situation Report 2016 Utility – Informal: TANESCO Financial 0.2 Statement, 2015 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on Tanzania Utility - Total: Tanzania Energy Access 32.8 24.6 Energy Access Situation Report, 2016 Situation Report, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on Tanzania Solar (Tier 1 and above): Tanzania Energy 32.7 Energy Access Situation Report 2016 and off- 8.1 Access Situation Report, 2016 grid rate reported by government, 2016 Tanzania’s latest household survey (Energy Access Situation Report, 2016) reported that 32.8% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 65.3% in urban areas to 16.9% in rural areas. In parallel, the Energy and Water Utility Regulatory Authority (EWURA) reported 1.7 million household connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.9, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 15.4%. Meanwhile, the utility estimated 0.8% of nontechnical loss in 2015. Assuming Tanzania's average household consumption is 1,392 kWh/year, an estimated additional 0.2% of the population may be obtaining grid electricity through informal connections. However, the 2016 Energy Access Situation Report, using household survey data, reported a much higher rate of grid connection at 24.6%. According to that report, 8.1% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 162 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification In Tanzania, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a significant increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 19 times that of the bottom quintile, and the access rate of the fourth quintile is half that of the top quintile. This disparity is more significant than what is seen in other large access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for male-headed households are higher compared to female-headed households by 1.3 percentage points. Overall, household consumption drives access disparity in Tanzania to a greater extent than gender. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2011 household head, 2011 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 62 60% 60% 50% 40% 40% 30% 29 24 22 20% 15 20% 10% 8 3 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 163 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 UGANDA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 30 Census DHS 20 AIS 2004–05 MIS DHS UNHS MIS 2015 DHS Census DHS 10 DHS 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 Utility data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, UMEME Annual reports, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) - No government report available 11.2 Utility – Formal: UMEME Annual Report, 2016 26.7 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on DHS 2016 - Utility – Informal World Energy Outlook 2017: based on 19.4 Contact at Ministry of Energy and Mineral 3.1 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Development, 2016 Uganda’s latest household survey (DHS, 2016) reported that 26.7% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 57.5% in urban areas to 18% in rural areas. In parallel, the utility UMEME, whose market share is 90%, reported 0.95 million connections in 2016. On the basis of the connections and a household size of 4.9, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 11.2%. There are no official statistics on nontechnical losses that could be used to gauge the extent of informal connections. An illustrative simulation of 1% nontechnical losses, based on Uganda’s average household consumption of 1,054 kWh/year, would translate into informal access of 0.2% of the population. The substantial gap between electrification rates reported by household surveys and those attributable to grid electrification by the utility can be partially explained by the development of off-grid solutions. According to IRENA, 3.1% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. Other forms of self-supply like diesel generators or rechargeable batteries may help to explain the remaining difference. 164 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification Disaggregated household survey data by socioeconomic groups in Uganda show a striking increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 36 percentage points higher than that of the bottom quintile, and the access rate of the fourth quintile is one-fourth that of the top quintile. The difference between the top quintile and the bottom four quintiles is more pronounced in Uganda compared to the average for the largest access deficit countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Notably, gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for female-headed households are marginally higher than male-headed households. Overall, household consumption, not gender, drives access disparity in Uganda. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2012 household head, 2012 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 38 40% 30% 20% 20% 10 11 10 10% 1 1 2 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 165 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ZAMBIA Electrification trends Share of population with access to electricity (%), comparative analysis, 1990-2016 100 90 80 Electrification rate (%) 70 60 50 40 MIS 2015 LCMS 2002–03 DHS 30 Census DHS LCMS 1998 Census DHS LCMS DHS 20 DHS 10 0 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 91 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 19 19 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 ZESCO data Estimates – Urban Estimates – Rural IEA electrification data SDG7 report model estimates (based on household survey) Household Survey data (referenced in SDG7 report) Source: World Bank 2018, Energy Regulatory Board Energy Sector Reports, WEO 2017, World Bank WDI Headline Electrification Rate (% of total population) Electrification Sub-Categories (% of total population) Utility – Formal: Energy Regulation Board, – No government report available 23.4 Energy Sector Report, 2016 Tracking SDG 7 report: based on model 27.2 – Utility – Informal estimate, 2016 World Energy Outlook 2017: based on 33.7 Department of Planning and Information, 0.003 Solar (Tier 1 and above): IRENA, 2016 Ministry of Energy, Zambia, 2016 Zambia’s latest household survey (Living Condition Measurement Survey, 2015) reported that 31.1% of the population has access to electricity, ranging from 67.7% in urban areas to 3.7% in rural areas. Model estimates, based on historical progress, suggest that the access rate should have reached about 27.2% by 2016. In parallel, the Energy Regulatory Board reported 0.76 million household connections in 2016. Based on the connections and a household size of 5.1, the formal grid connection rate is estimated at 23.4%. There are no official statistics on nontechnical losses to gauge the prevalence of informal connections. An illustrative simulation shows that nontechnical losses of 1%, given Zambia’s average household consumption is 3,953 kWh/year, could potentially provide informal access to 0.31% of population in 2016. Otherwise, the gap between utility connection rates and access reported in household surveys could potentially be attributed to off-grid solutions, including diesel generation and rechargeable batteries. According to IRENA, only a negligible share of 0.003% of the population relied on solar home systems, solar mini-grids, and solar lighting systems providing Tier 1 and above service in 2016. 166 Annex 2 • Shedding light on electrification data: Trends and patterns of electrification Patterns of electrification In Zambia, disaggregating access by consumption quintiles (from poorest to richest) shows a stark increase in access rates as overall household welfare rises. The access rate of the top quintile is 36 times that of the bottom quintile, and twice that of the fourth quintile. This disparity in the top quintiles is similar to what is seen in countries with the largest access deficit in Sub-Saharan Africa. Notably, gender-disaggregated access rates show that access rates for male-headed households are higher than female-headed households by over 5 percentage points, in contrast to the gender parity in access seen in Sub-Saharan Africa. Overall, household consumption, not gender, drives access disparity in Zambia. Electricity access by quintiles of Electricity access by gender of household welfare, 2010 household head, 2010 100% 100% Share of Households (%) Share of Households (%) 90% 80% 75 80% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 34 40% 30% 27 21 20% 20% 12 10% 5 2 0% 0% Lowest Second Middle Fourth Top quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Female-headed Households Electrified (%) Quintile of household welfare Male-headed Households Electrified (%) Electrified Households (%) Source: [GMD] ([SSA]TSD/World Bank – latest year available) 167 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Partnership The development of the Tracking SDG7 Report was made possible by exceptional collaboration between the five SDG7 custodian agencies, specially constituted in a Steering Group: • International Energy Agency (IEA) • World Bank (WB) • International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) • World Health Organization (WHO) • United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) The Steering Group was supported by an Advisory Group composed as follows. • Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) • United Nations Economic Commission for Africa • Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (“the Alliance”) (UNECA) • Global Water Partnership (GWP) • United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) • International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) • United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) • International Network on Gender and Sustainable Energy (ENERGIA) • United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) • International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation (IPEEC) • United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) • Practical Action • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) • Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21) • Copenhagen Centre on Energy Efficiency • Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) • UN Energy • Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) • United Nations Foundation (UNF) • United Nations Department of Economics and Social • United Nations Industrial Development Organization Affairs (UNDESA) (UNIDO) • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) • World Energy Council (WEC) In the context of the 2018 SDG7 Review, the Steering Group also received valuable guidance from the Ad Hoc Working Group convened for this purpose by the UN, and co-chaired by Hans-Olav Ibrekk and Sheila Oparaocha. It also benefited from being able to draw on the Policy Briefs prepared as part of the SDG7 Review process. Financial support from The Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), to fund tasks managed by the World Bank, is gratefully acknowledged. ESMAP is a global knowledge and technical assistance program administered by the World Bank. It provides analytical and advisory services to low- and middle income countries to increase their know-how and institutional capacity to achieve environmentally sustainable energy solutions for poverty reduction and economic growth. ESMAP is funded by Australia, Austria, Denmark, the European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, the Rockefeller Foundation, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, as well as the World Bank. The report was launched at the Sustainable Energy for All Forum in Lisbon in May 2018 at the invitation of Rachel Kyte (Special Representative of the Secretary General for Sustainable Energy for All), and supported by her communications team. 168 Acknowledgments Authorship The technical co-leadership of the project by the Custodian Agencies was the responsibility of Laura Cozzi and Hannah Daly (IEA), Rabia Ferroukhi (IRENA), Ralf Becker (UNSD), Vivien Foster (World Bank), Heather Adair-Rohani (World Health Organization). • The chapter on electrification was prepared by the World Bank (Juliette Besnard, Yi Xu, Sharmila Bellur, Malcolm Cosgrove-Davies) and benefited from substantive contributions from IEA (Hannah Daly) and IRENA (Adrian Whiteman). • The chapter on clean cooking was prepared by the World Bank (Juliette Besnard, Sharmila Bellur, Yi Xu, Yabei Zhang) with substantive contributions from the World Health Organization (Heather Adair-Rohani, Jessica Lewis). • The chapter on renewable energy was prepared by the World Bank (Zuzana Dobrotkova, Tigran Paravanyan, Christopher Jackson, Olivier Lavagne d’Ortigues) with substantial contributions from IEA (Paolo Frankl, Yasmina Abdelilah, Roberta Quadrelli, Ute Collier, Pharoah Le Feuvre), IRENA (Rabia Ferroukhi, Michael Renner, Divyam Nagpal, Adrian Whiteman) and UNSD (Ralf Becker, Leonardo Souza, Agnieszka Koscielniak). • The chapter on energy efficiency prepared by the World Bank (Ivan Jaques, Daron Bedrosyan, Hua Du, Sarah Moin) with substantial contributions from IEA (Samuel Thomas, Kathleen Gaffney, Roberta Quadrelli) and UNSD (Ralf Becker, Leonardo Souza, Agnieszka Koscielniak). • The chapter on prospects was led by IEA (Hannah Daly) with substantive contributions from IRENA (Ricardo Gorini) Data sources The report draws on two metadatabases of global household surveys, the Global Electrification Database managed by the World Bank, and a database on access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking managed by WHO. Energy balance statistics and indicators for renewable energy and energy efficiency were prepared by IEA (Roberta Quadrelli, Remi Gigoux and Francesco Mattion) and UNSD. Gross domestic product and value-added data are provided by the World Development Indicators of the World Bank. Population data comes the United Nations Population Division. Review and consultation The public consultation and peer review process was coordinated by Vivien Foster (World Bank) and Hannah Murdock (REN21) and benefited from use of the REN21 online consultation platform. Substantive comments were also provided by Alexander Kauer (BMZ), Bertrand Magne (SEforALL), Flavia Guerra (REN21), Deger Saygin, Dr (SHURA Energy Transition Centre), Andries Hof (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency), Anteneh Dagnachew (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency), Gianluca Sambucini (UNECE), Iqbal Akbar (Technische Universität Berlin), Jonathan Guerrero (Independent), Michael Taylor (IRENA), Samuel Mwangi (Virunga Power), Stephen Schuck (Stephen Schuck and Associates Pty Ltd), Tatiana Khanberg (IGU), Utkarsh Shukla (Independent), William Blyth (Oxford Energy Associate), Zahra Molavi (Shahr Petro Energy Group). The IEA’s internal review process was led by Rebecca Gaghen, David Turk, and Laura Cozzi. UNSD’s internal review process was led by Ralf Becker, with contributions from Leonardo Souza and Agnieszka Koscielniak. The World Bank’s internal peer review process was led by Riccardo Puliti, with contributions from Rohit Khanna, Raihan Elahi, Gabriela Elizondo, Besnik Hyseni Dana Rysankova, Ashok Sarkar, and Umar Serajuddin. Outreach The communications process was coordinated by Nicholas Keyes, Anita Rozowska and Mariana Kaipper Ceratti (World Bank), Jad Mouawad (IEA), Elizabeth Press and Sasha Ramirez-Hughes (IRENA). The online platform (http://tracking SDG7.esmap.org) was developed by Sreejith K.S., Narayanan R., and Ram Prasad of Advanced Software Systems Inc. The report was edited, designed, and typeset by Nora Mara, Lauren Kaley Johnson, and Jeffrey Dean Lawrence (World Bank). 169 Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CAGR Compound annual growth rate MJ Megajoules COP21 2015 United Nations Climate Change MTF Multi-Tier Framework Conference (Paris Agreement) MW Megawatt DHS Demographic and Health Survey NOAA The National Oceanic and Atmospheric DISCO Distribution Utility Administration ECAPOV Europe and Central Asia Poverty Database NSS National Sample Survey EJ Exajoules OECD Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program PAYGO Pay-as-you-go EU European Union PPA Power purchase agreement EVs Electric Vehicles PPP Purchasing power parity FiT Feed-in tariff PV Photovoltaic HIES Household Income Expenditure Survey RE Renewable Energy GDP Gross domestic product REN21 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century GED Global Electrification Database RISE Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy GHACCO Ghana Alliance for Clean Cookstoves and Fuels SAIDI System Average Interruption Duration Index GNI Gross national income SAIFI System Average Interruption Frequency Index GOGLA Global Off-Grid Lighting Association SDG Sustainable Development Goal GPWG-DB Global Poverty Working Group Database SEDLAC Socio-Economic Database for Latin America GW Gigawatt and the Caribbean ICT Information and communications T&D Transmission and distribution technology TFEC Total final energy consumption IEA International Energy Agency TPES Total primary energy supply IFC International Finance Corporation TJ Terajoules IRENA International Renewable Energy Agency TWh Terawatt-hours IRES International Recommendations for Energy Statistics UN United Nations LDC Least developed country UNSD United Nations Statistics Division LSMS Living Standards Measurement Survey USAID United States Agency for International Development LPG Liquified Petroleum Gas WB World Bank MEPS Minimum Energy Performance Standards WDI World Development Indicators MICS Multi-Indicator Cluster Survey WEO World Energy Outlook MIS Malaria Indicator Survey WHO World Health Organization 170 Visit the SDG7 Tracking website to download data and reports, as well as customized maps, comparative graphics, timelines, and country reports. http://trackingSDG7.esmap.org Advisory group of partner agencies Funding gratefully acknowledged from