Skip to main content

Energy Demand Forecasting

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Energy Economics

Abstract

This chapter presents alternative approaches used in forecasting energy demand and discusses their pros and cons. It covers both simple approaches based on indicators and more sophisticated approaches using econometric methods, end-use method and other techniques. The chapter builds on the materials presented in Chaps. 3 and 4 and explains how demand analysis tools are extended to make forecasts for the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The full database is available by contacting: indoorair@who.int.

  2. 2.

    See Reister (1990) for an example. We also discuss the POLES model in Sect. 4, which can also be considered a hybrid model.

  3. 3.

    See Ghanadan and Koomey (2005) for an example.

  4. 4.

    See Sun (2001). The results of the study show a significant divergence with actual EU15 demand.

  5. 5.

    See Munasinghe and Meier (1993), Labys and Asano (1990).

  6. 6.

    Al-Saba and El-Amin (1999) for an application.

  7. 7.

    This section and the section on hybrid method are based on Bhattacharyya and Timilsina (2009).

  8. 8.

    https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/what-are-scenarios.html (accessed on 2nd June 2018).

  9. 9.

    See Jefferson (2000) for a brief history of WEC efforts in energy scenario development. The latest study WEC (2016) has considered three exploratory scenarios—Modern Jazz, Unfinished Symphony and Hard Rock—to initiate a dialogue on the Grand Transition.

  10. 10.

    The tool can be obtained by sending a request at communication@theshiftproject.org.

  11. 11.

    The model can found here: http://streammodel.org/index.html (last accessed on 2nd June, 2018).

  12. 12.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/2050-pathways-analysis (last accessed on 2nd June, 2018).

  13. 13.

    The tool can be found here: http://www.iess2047.gov.in (last accessed on 2nd June, 2018).

  14. 14.

    See for example Special Issue of Energy Journal (November 2006) on this theme.

  15. 15.

    Armstrong (2001).

References

  • Al-Saba, T., & El-Amin, I. (1999). Artifical neural networks as applied to long-term demand. Artifical Intelligence and Engineering, 13, 189–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amber, K. P., Ahmad, R., Aslam, M. W., Kousar, A., Usman, M., & Khan, M. S. (2018, May 25). Intelligent techniques for forecasting electricity consumption of buildings, energy. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.05.155. ISSN 0360-5442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APERC. APEC energy demand and supply outlook (6th ed.). Annex1: Modelling assumptions & methodologies, Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre, Institute of Energy Economics of Japan, Tokyo. Retrieved from http://aperc.ieej.or.jp/file/2016/5/10/APEC_Outlook6th_Annex_I_Modelling_assumptions_and_methodologies.pdf.

  • Armstrong, J. S. (Ed.). (2001). Principles of Forecasting: A handbook for researchers and practitioners. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bataille, C., Jaccard, M., Nyboer, J., & Rivers, N. (2006, November). Towards general-equilibrium in a technology-rich model with empirically estimated behaviour parameters. The Energy Journal, Special Issue, 93–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benichou, L., & Mayr, S. (2014). Rogeaulito: A world energy scenario modelling tool for transparent energy system thinking. Frontier of Energy Research, 1, https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.00013.

  • Bentzen, J., & Linderoth, H. (2001, June). Has the of energy projections in OECD countries improved since the 1970s? OPEC Review, 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya, S. C., & Thanh, L. T. (2004). Short term electric load using an artificial neural network: Case of Northern Vietnam. International Journal of Energy Research, 28(5), 463–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya, S. C., & Timilsina, G. R. (2009, March 2). Energy demand models for policy formulation: A comparative study of energy demand models. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper WPS4866.

    Google Scholar 

  • BP Statistical Review of World Energy. (2017). BP plc, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codoni, R., Park, H. C., & Ramani, K. V. (1985). Integrated energy planning—A manual. Kuala Lumpur: Asia Pacific Development Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P. P., Gadgil, A., & Koomey, J. G. (2002). What can history teach us? A retrospective examination of long-term energy forecasts for the United States. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 27, 83–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EIA. (2017). Annual energy outlook retrospective review: Evaluation of 2016 and prior reference case projections. US Department of Energy, Washington, DC. Retrieved June 2, 2018, from https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/retrospective/pdf/retrospective.pdf.

  • Ghanadan, R., & Koomey, J. G. (2005). Using energy scenarios to explore alternative energy pathways in California. Energy Policy, 33, 1117–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaps, C. (2002). Integrated energy-environment modelling and LEAP, SEI. Retrieved from http://www.energycommunity.org/default.asp?action=42.

  • Hippert, H. S., Pedreira, C. E., & Souza, R. C. (2001). Neural networks for short-term load forecasting: A review and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 16(1), 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAEA. (2006). Model for analysis of energy demand, (MAED-2), Manual 18. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, M. (2000). Long-term energy scenarios: The approach of the World Energy Council. International Journal of Global Warming Issues, 3(1–3), 277–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koomey, J. G. (2002). From my perspective: Avoiding “the Big Mistake” in technology adoption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69, 511–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, C. C., & te Velde, D. W. (2001). Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy model. Energy Economics, 23, 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labys, W. C., & Asano, H. (1990). Process models, special issue of energy. Energy, 15(3&4), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapillonne, B. (1978). MEDEE-2: A model for long-term energy demand evaluation, RR-78-17. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Austria. Retrieved from http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/RR-78-017.pdf.

  • Leydon, K., Decker, M., & Waterlaw, J. (1996). European energy to 2020: A scenario. Directorate General For Energy (DG XVII), European Commission, Brussels. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/energy/library/e2020fd.pdf.

  • Lipinsky, A. (1990). Introduction, Section 2, Demand forecasting methodologies, special issue of energy. Energy, 15(3&4), 207–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R., & Blair, P. (1985). Input output analysis: Foundations and extensions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munasinghe, M., & Meier, P. (1993). Energy policy analysis and modeling. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Paltsev, S. (2016, December 28). Energy scenarios: The value and limits of scenario analysis. WIREs Energy and Environment, https://doi.org/10.1002/wene.242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reister, D. B. (1990). The hybrid approach to demand modeling. Special issue of Energy, Energy, 15(3&4), 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shell. (2003). Scenarios: An explorer’s guide. Shell International, The Netherlands. Retrieved from http://www-static.shell.com/static/aboutshell/downloads/our_strategy/shell_global_scenarios/scenario_explorersguide.pdf.

  • Shell. (2018). Shell Scenarios: Sky—Meeting the goals of the Paris agreement. Shell International. Retrieved June 2, 2018, from www.shell.com/skyscenarios.

  • Sun, J. W. (2001). Energy demand in the fifteen European Union countries by 2010: A model based on the decomposition approach. Energy, 26(6), 549–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wandji, Y. D. F., & Bhattacharyya, S. C. (2017). Evaluation of economic rent from hydroelectric power developments: Evidence from Cameroon. The Journal of Energy and Development, 42(1–2), 239–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • WEC. (2016). The grand transition. World Energy Council (in collaboration with Accenture Strategy and Paul Scherrer Institute), London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Q., Hasanbeigi, A., Price, L., Lu, H., & Arens, M. (2016). A bottom-up energy efficiency improvement road map for China’s iron and steel industry up to 2050. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, USA. Retrieved from http://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-1006356.pdf.

Further Reading

  • Chakravorty, U., et al. (2000). Domestic Demand for Petroleum in OPEC Countries. OPEC Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, C. (1994, Spring). A Survey of oil product demand elasticities for developing countries. OPEC Review, 47–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moroney, J. R. (Ed.). (1997). Advances in the economics of energy and resources (Vol. 10). London: Energy Demand and Supply, Jai Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterner, T. (Ed.). (1992). International energy economics. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J. W. (1998). Changes in energy consumption and energy intensity: A complete decomposition model. Energy Economics, 20(1), 85–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Subhes C. Bhattacharyya .

Annex 5.1: Mathematical Representation of Demand Forecasting Using the Input–Output Model

Annex 5.1: Mathematical Representation of Demand Forecasting Using the Input–Output Model

The value of output relations in a set of inter-industry accounts can be defined as:

$$ X_{i} = \sum\limits_{j = 1}^{n} {X_{ij} + \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{r} {F_{ik} } } ;i = 1,2, \ldots n $$
(5.12)

where Xi is the value of total output of industry i, Xij is the value of intermediate goods’ output of industry i sold to industry j, and Fik is the value of final goods’ output of industry i sold to final demand category k (net of competitive import sales).

The final demand arises from a number of sources, which is shown in Eq. (5.13):

$$ \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{r} {F_{ik} } = C_{i} + \Delta V_{i} + I_{i} + G_{i} + E_{i} - M_{Fi} $$
(5.13)

where Ci is the value of private consumer demand for industry i final output, Vi is the value of inventory investment demand for industry i final output, Ii is the value of private fixed investment demand for industry i final output, Gi is the value of government demand for industry i final output, Ei is the value of export demand for industry i final output and MFi is the value of imports of industry i final output (and often referred to as competitive imports).

It is assumed that intermediate input requirements are a constant proportion of total output, which is expressed as:

$$ a_{ij} = \frac{{x_{ij} }}{{X_{j} }} $$
(5.14)

where aij is the fixed input–output coefficient or technical coefficient of production.

Equations (5.12), (5.13) and (5.14) can be written more concisely in matrix form as

$$ {\text{X}} = {\text{AX}} + {\text{F}} $$
(5.15)
F:

vector of final demand

A:

matrix of inter-industry coefficients

X:

vector of gross outputs

The well-known solution for gross output of each sector is given by

$$ {\text{X}} = \left( {{\text{I}} - {\text{A}}} \right)^{ - 1} {\text{F}} $$
(5.16)

where I is the identity matrix, and (I−A)−1 is the Leontief inverse matrix.

Thus, given the input–output coefficient matrix A, and given various final demand scenarios for F, it is straightforward to calculate from Eq. (5.15), the corresponding new values required for total output X, and intermediate outputs xij of each industry.

For energy analysis, the basic input output model is extended to include energy services. It is considered that the input–output coefficient matrix can be decomposed and expanded to account for energy supply industries (e.g. crude oil, traditional fuels, etc.), energy services or product equations (e.g. agriculture, iron and steel, water transportation).

Equation (5.16) is modified to a more general system as shown in Eq. (5.17)

$$ \begin{aligned} & {\text{A}}_{\text{ss}} {\text{X}}_{\text{s}} + {\text{A}}_{\text{sp}} {\text{X}}_{\text{p}} + {\text{F}}_{\text{s}} = {\text{X}}_{\text{s}} \\ & {\text{A}}_{\text{ps}} {\text{X}}_{\text{s}} + {\text{A}}_{\text{pi}} {\text{Xi}} + {\text{F}}_{\text{p}} = {\text{X}}_{\text{p}} \\ & {\text{A}}_{\text{is}} {\text{X}}_{\text{s}} + {\text{A}}_{\text{ii}} {\text{X}}_{\text{i}} + {\text{F}}_{\text{i}} = {\text{X}}_{\text{i}} \\ \end{aligned} $$
(5.17)

where

Xs:

output vector for energy supply,

Xp:

output vector for energy products,

Xi:

output vector for non-energy sectors,

Fs:

final demand for energy supply,

Fp:

final demand for energy products,

Fi:

final demand for non-energy sectors,

Ass:

I/O coefficients describing sales of the output of one energy/ supply conversion sector to another energy conversion sector.

Asp:

I/O coefficients describing how distributed energy products are converted to end-use forms.

Asi:

0 implying that energy supplies are not used by non-energy producing sectors. Energy is distributed to the non-energy producing sectors via energy product sectors.

Aps:

I/O coefficients describing how energy products—final energy forms—are used by the energy supplying industries.

App:

0 implying that energy products are not used to produce energy products

Api:

I/O coefficients describing how energy products—final energy forms are used by non-energy producing sectors.

Ais:

I/O coefficients describing the uses of non-energy materials and services by the energy industry.

Aip:

0 implying that energy product sectors equipment require no material or service inputs. This is because they are pseudo sectors and not real producing sectors.

Aii:

I/O coefficients describing how non-energy products are used in the non-energy producing sectors.

If we rewrite Eq. (5.6) in the summary form,

XE = AE XE + FE, where the superscript E indicates energy input–output matrices, the equivalent equation of Eq. (5.16) is

$$ {\text{X}}^{\text{E}} = \left( {{\text{I}} - {\text{A}}^{\text{E}} } \right)^{ - 1} {\text{F}}^{\text{E}} $$
(5.18)

We could then calculate the various alternative final energy demand scenarios, the corresponding new total output requirements for non-energy industry and energy supply industry and energy services output and their respective intermediate outputs. Some perspective on inter-fuel substitution could also be gained, if one were satisfied that prices would not significantly influence the substitution process and if one were satisfied that the assumption of constant input output relationships would be true in practice.

Source Based on Chap. 7, Macro-Demand Analysis, of Codoni et al. (1985). See also Miller and Blair (1985).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bhattacharyya, S.C. (2019). Energy Demand Forecasting. In: Energy Economics. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7468-4_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics