BP, IEA and ADB: Graphs that did not match
And here is whay I am keep getting confused.
ADB in its report saying that energy growth always exceed the economy growth. ADB claim that economy growth is around 6% and energy demand is 7-8% and domestic demand around 8-8.5% per annum (ADB assume from PLN electricity growth). This data seems fine but it is innacurate. Goodbye ADB, connecting economy and energy growth is complicated
BP and IEA, provide reasonable number. BP CAGR 2002-2012 is 4.62% and IEA CAGR 2002-20012 is more realistics at 2.49%.
ADB saying that in 2013 the TPES comprised of Oil 46%, Coal 23.9%, Gas 24% and RE 5% – which most likely government number. But looking at IEA data is Oil 48%, Coal 18%, Gas 21% RE 10% (which already excluding biomass).
The problem is not that ADB data seems unreliable, but the main problem connecting energy policy and economic policy is not that easy, its very complicated.
Here is the things:
1. Is the solution of energy problem only can be solved from energy point of view? e.g the problem is higher demand than supply, so solution is increase supply reduce demand is diverse the energy sources. (Bottom up)
- Or is the solution of problem only can be solved from economic point of view? e.g the problem is current market is not efficient, so solution to increase supply and reduce demand is to grow the market. (Top down)
So how do I choose? in my case, what should I see is from the bottom up perspective. It is bit painfull compare with top down, by using macro assumption. In bottom up, we need to have detail data on each energy sources e.g coal, biofuel and also have detail sectoral consumption (transport, residential). However the solution is from bottom up perspective e.g shifting the fuel mix.
My suggestion is we should have a very detailed tracked data, which is bottom up approach. Especially in the case of large country like Indonesia. However it is sad that the current approach, which is faster is using top down approach.