DEVELOPMENT

3.5.4
Energy intensity
The energy intensity of the country’s economy is calculated
in units of energy, per unit of GDP. The reciprocal
value of energy intensity is also called energy efficiency,
which is considered to be an important indicator of sustainable
development.
Estonia’s economy is extremely energy intensive.
One of the main reasons for the great intensity of energy
consumption is, again, the limited efficiency of producing
power from oil shale (the efficiency of converting oil shale
into electrical power is approximately 30%). During the last
few years, this has also been affected by the sudden decline
in GDP, due to the economic crisis. Compared to 2000,
final energy consumption has increased in almost all sectors;
a decline in industry consumption occurred in Estonia
and in the EU, in 2009; and also, in agriculture and forestry,
in the EU, on average (Statistics Estonia). For instance, the
household electricity consumption in Estonia increased
approximately 30%, between 2000 and 2010 (15% in the
entire EU), which shows that technological innovations
have not been accompanied by a reduction in electricity
consumption. The continued utilisation of outdated equipment
and technologies, which use power inefficiently, has
resulted in large energy consumption in buildings, energy
losses in transmission and distribution, and the great energy
intensity of the economy, which all increase energy demand
(Ministry of the Environment 2009).
After years of lower energy use, the energy intensity
of Estonia’s economy has started to increase again
(Figure 3.5.7) and, instead of improving energy efficiency
by 20%, as specified by the development plan for the
energy industry, it has actually declined by approximately
the same percentage.
Compared to the other European countries, Estonia
together with Bulgaria and Romania comprise the bottom
three in regard to the energy intensity of their economies
(Figure 3.5.8). This means that four times more energy is
expended in Estonia, for every euro of national income,
than is the average in the European Union. In comparison
to our main trading partners, Estonia’s economy
seems especially costly, as far as energy is concerned – in
2010, the energy intensity, per unit of GDP, was 4.3 times
higher than in Sweden, almost 3 times higher than in
Finland, and 1.8 times as high as in Latvia (Eurostat).
3.5.5
Resource productivity
There are two aspects to the assessment of the utilisation
of natural resources: the quantities that are used, and the
efficiency of that use. In order to reduce the utilised quantities,
while maintaining the same levels of production,
the efficiency of the utilisation of the natural resources
has to be improved. Therefore, in addition to the indicators
that characterise the absolute level of the utilisation of
the natural resources, indicators that show the efficiency
of the utilisation of the natural resources are also necessary.
To arrive at these, the indicators on the utilisation of
natural resources are connected to economic indicators.
One of these indicators of economic efficiency is resource
Figure 3.5.5
Estonia’s Carbon Footprint in relation to the trade
balance, 2004.
kg oil eq/€ 1000
Households, direct
(transport and heating)
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
Households, indirect
5
0
Government sector
Services
4%
Goods
13%
2001
2002
Capital
Total Footprint
Imported Carbon
Footprint
Exported Carbon
Footprint
million tonnes CO 2
, eq
Construction
6%
Other
14%
Food
13%
2003
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Source: Norwegian University of Science and Technology 2009
Figure 3.5.6
Estonia’s Carbon Footprint by consumption sector, 2004.
Source: One Planet Economy Network 2011
2004
2005
2006
2007
Housing
33%
Mobility
17%
Figure 3.5.7
The energy intensity of Estonia’s economy, 2001–2010
Source: Eurostat
2008
2009
2010
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
143