Decarbonization scenarios that are compatible with the achievement of the Paris Accord to keep global warming well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels consider both the supply and the demand side in the necessary transformation of the energy system. On the supply side, economic and physical upper limits exist due to the assumptions of how much energy can be provided from renewable sources on the one hand, and how much CO2 removal infrastructure is used to compensate for remaining emissions from fossil fuels on the other. On the demand side [@creutzig_towards_2018] there are lower limits to how much energy is minimally required for a decent life [@grubler_low_2018 @millward-hopkins_providing_2020], depending on different assumptions about the available infrastructure of energy services, as well the prevalent social ideas about what constitutes a good life. Maximum possible energy supply and minimum necessary energy demand describe a space in which the simultaneous achievement of climate targets and a decent living for all depends on the distribution of available energy services among the population.
Decarbonizing the energy system in accordance with the Paris Accord requires a deep transformation of both the supply and the demand side (ref). On both sides, however, necessary transformation is restricted by different factors. On the supply side, there exist economic and physical upper limits of how much energy can be provided from renewable sources on the one hand, and how much CO2 removal infrastructure is used to compensate for remaining emissions from fossil fuels on the other. On the demand side [@creutzig_towards_2018], by contrast, there are lower limits to how much energy is minimally required for a decent life [@grubler_low_2018 @millward-hopkins_providing_2020], depending on different assumptions about the available infrastructure of energy services, as well as the prevalent social ideas about what constitutes a good life (ref). Maximum possible energy supply and minimum necessary energy demand describe the space in which the simultaneous achievement of climate targets and a decent living for all is possible and, at the same time, restricts the distribution of available energy services among the population. If this dual objective is taken seriously in European climate policy, then there are practical limits to how unequal the society of the future can be, which go beyond the purely political. In fact, a limited energy supply creates an obvious, if rarely acknowledged, zero-sum game where energetic over-consumption by some has to be compensated by less consumption by others.
If this dual objective is taken seriously in European climate policy, then there are practical limits to how unequal the society of the future can be, which go beyond the purely political. The European Green Deal already recognizes that inequalities in incomes, energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions lead to different responsibilities and capacities in achieving the emission savings targets, and includes proposals to increase equity and political acceptance. However, a limited energy supply creates an obvious, if rarely acknowledged, zero-sum game where energetic overconsumption by some has to be compensated by less consumption by others.
The European Green Deal already recognizes that inequalities in incomes, energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions lead to different responsibilities and capacities in achieving the emission savings targets (ref), and includes proposals to increase equity and political acceptance [*which are?*].
The average energy footprint of EU citizens was X GJ per capita in 2011 [oswald_large_2020] and the carbon footprint 8.2 tonnes CO2e per capita in 2007 [@ivanova_environmental_2016]. However, the differences in average energy and carbon footprints are large within and between different regions in the EU. Energy footprints ranged from X to Y GJ per capita in 2011 [@oswald_large_2020] and carbon footprints from below 2.5 tonnes CO2eq per capita to 55 tonnes CO2eq per capita in 2010 [@ivanova_unequal_2020]. Depending on the assumptions of different global mitigation scenarios, the average footprints need to be reduced to between 15.7 and 100 GJ per capita [@grubler_low_2018 @millward-hopkins_providing_2020] or 0.7 and 2.1 tCO2e per capita [@akenji_1.5-degree_2019] by 2050, respectively.
The average energy footprint of EU citizens was X GJ per capita in 2011 [@oswald_large_2020] and the carbon footprint 8.2 tonnes CO2e per capita in 2007 [@ivanova_environmental_2016]. However, the differences in average energy and carbon footprints are large within and between different regions in the EU. Energy footprints ranged from X to Y GJ per capita in 2011 [@oswald_large_2020] and carbon footprints from below 2.5 tonnes CO2eq per capita to 55 tonnes CO2eq per capita in 2010 [@ivanova_unequal_2020]. Depending on the assumptions of different global mitigation scenarios, the average footprints need to be reduced to between 15.7 and 100 GJ per capita [@grubler_low_2018 @millward-hopkins_providing_2020] or 0.7 and 2.1 tCO2e per capita [@akenji_1.5-degree_2019] by 2050, respectively.
We assess under what conditions European energy inequality is compatible with the achievement of global climate goals and a decent standard of living following these steps. We first construct common European expenditure deciles based on national income stratified household expenditure data from EUROSTAT covering 28 European countries, further stratified by 5 consumption sectors. We then calculate average household energy and carbon footprints per European expenditure decile and consumption sector to explore the current structure of energy and carbon intensities across these categories. Based on these results, we use the current empirical per sector best technology to calculate a homogenized counterfactual European household energy demand distribution (and associated emissions) at current European consumption levels. We report energy and emissions savings per expenditure decile and country and relate the resulting energy demand to available supply across different global 1.5°C scenarios from the literature. Using assumptions on decent living energy demand and available energy supply from different 1.5°C scenarios show how the homogenized European energy demand distribution would need to be transformed (flattened) to conform to these constraints. We report exemplary implications for energy use in different expenditure deciles. We discuss some implications for policy through the paper.
In this paper, we assess under what conditions European energy inequality is compatible with the achievement of global climate goals and a decent standard of living, taking both inequality within and between European countries into account. To this end, we first construct energy and carbon footprints for harmonized European expenditure deciles combining data from EUROSTAT's Household Budget Survey (HBS) with the Environmentally-Extended Multi-Regional Input-Output (EE-MRIO) model EXIOBASE. After exploring the distribution of energy and carbon intensities across European expenditure deciles and consumption purposes, we compare this current structure to an empirical per sector best technology counterfactual. We find that even under best currently available technology per sector, X% of European households ... [*one sentence on the main finding from comparing current vs. best technology*]. [*to my opinion, this is too detailed information for an introduction - from 'EUROSTAT's Household Budget Survey.....' to here*]. Finally, we relate the energy demands under best technology[*?*] to available supply across different global 1.5°C scenarios from the literature and examine how the energy inequality across households must change, in order to achieve a decent life for all. We find that ... [*one sentence on the main finding from 1.5 degree scenarios*]. Based on our findings, we discuss implications for energy use in different expenditure deciles as well as for policy.
# Materials and methods
# Materials and methods
## Income-stratified national environmental footprints
## Income-stratified national environmental footprints
We first decomposed national household final demand expenditure in the Environmentally-Extended Multi-Regional Input-Output (EE-MRIO) model EXIOBASE (version3, industry-by-industry) [@stadler_exiobase_2018], by income quintile, using European household budget survey (HBS) macro-data from EUROSTAT [@eurostat_database_nodate]. The EUROSTAT HBS publishes national data on mean consumption expenditure by income quintile (in purchasing power standard (PPS) euro) and the structure of consumption expenditure by income quintile and COICOP consumption category.
We first decomposed national household final demand expenditure in the EE-MRIO model EXIOBASE (version3, industry-by-industry) [@stadler_exiobase_2018], by income quintile, using European household budget survey (HBS) macro-data from EUROSTAT [@eurostat_database_nodate]. The EUROSTAT HBS publishes national data on mean consumption expenditure by income quintile (in purchasing power standard (PPS) euro) and the structure of consumption expenditure by income quintile and COICOP consumption category.
We mapped the EXIOBASE sectors to one of the COICOP consumption categories (our mapping can be found in the SI), and used the relative shares of each COICOP consumption category between the income quintiles in the HBS to decompose the EXIOBASE national household final demand expenditure per sector by income quintile as well. We then multiplied this income-stratified EXIOBASE national household final demand expenditure by 'total' energy use and carbon intensities per EXIOBASE sector, calculated in EXIOBASE using standard input-output calculations, to estimate national household energy and carbon footprints stratified by income quintile.
We mapped the EXIOBASE sectors to one of the COICOP consumption categories (our mapping can be found in the SI), and used the relative shares of each COICOP consumption category between the income quintiles in the HBS to decompose the EXIOBASE national household final demand expenditure per sector by income quintile as well. We then multiplied this income-stratified EXIOBASE national household final demand expenditure by 'total' energy use and carbon intensities per EXIOBASE sector, calculated in EXIOBASE using standard input-output calculations, to estimate national household energy and carbon footprints stratified by income quintile.
