A Sustainable Energy Index

In my most recent post, I explored one aspect of energy metrics which is always overlooked - the the embodied energy in traded goods, or as I have labelled it, virtual energy. 

When considering resource exploitation, measurement is almost as important as impacts. Of course, if you do not fully understand what quantity is impactful, then how can you ever expect to gauge what level is exploitative? This idea is explored by Steffen (et al., 2015), who has provided "planetary boundaries" for many global-scale environmental impacts. However, one of the main issues with global-scale metrics is they are not always suitable for all countries. Garrick and Hall (2014) provide a nice example of the issues surrounding water security indicators and metrics. Although country specific metrics are unhelpful, as they prevent comparison between countries... nevertheless this has been attempted!

Even Dilbert needs to have good metrics! (Source)

A new paper from Narula and Reddy (2015) demonstrates an assessment for exiting energy systems, which produces a metric assessing their sustainable energy security (SES) in developing countries. This work has been inspired by Ren and Sovacool (2014) who assessed the appropriateness of 24 different energy metrics. In a carbon- and climate-focused paradigm, the sustainability aspect of energy policies is also a vital consideration.

The SES index is design to evaluate the availability, affordability efficiency and environmental appropriateness using sub-metrics. The approach is modular, multidimensional, flexible and can include the entire energy system, capturing stakeholders and concerns, making it suitable for policy design and when moving towards a sustainable and a secure energy future. covers the entire energy system. The flexibility of variables and use of modules makes this metric suitable as the index can be made country specific.

Overall, the metric sounds good. The built in flexibility of the metric allows for country-specific aspects, whilst a modular approach also provides sub-metrics which can be utilised.

However, Narula and Reddy (2015) neglect to explain why this metric would be suited only for developing countries. A metric should be created with universality in mind, as comparison is key to understand what the metric values really mean. 

Metrics are easy to critique - their lack of specialisation or generalisation of certain topics and aspects are two recurring and common issues. However global metrics are required. And even though Steffen (et al., 2015) may have been critiqued for his designation of "planetary boundaries", his work creates a baseline for future and past comparison using his metrics.