ENERGY ANALYSIS (EA)
Introduction
Energy analysis basically determines the energy implications of actions so that alternatives can be compared in term of their energy consequences. Since many impacts can be interpreted in energy terms and since measurements can be made in uniform energy units, the method can viewed as grand index approach to evaluation.
The term energy approach was adopted in 1970s by an international group to refer to work previously call energy accounting, energy budgeting, energy costing and energy system analysis.
Three roles that EA can play in evaluation * EA is a comprehensive method which can be used instead of the CBA for evaluating public actions, especially those having significant environmental consequences. * EA should be used as a comprehensive method to evaluate alternative plans for energy conservation and development.’ * EA as an evaluation tool for assessing energy resource implications of energy conservation and development programs and projects.
Therefore the three methods can be reduced to EA as a comprehensive evaluation method versus EA as a tool of for measuring limited set of impacts
EA as A Comprehensive Methodology
The importance of energy as a measure of value is underscored by the view that energy is the most fundamental limiting factor on all human action. NOTHING CAN HAPPEN WITHOUT ENERGY. All work requires it as a driving force.
Odum- in the affair of forests, seas, cities and human beings, the potential energy sources that area available flow through each process, doing and driving useful work. The availability of power sources determine the amount of work activity that can exist and control of these power flows determines the power in mans affairs and in his relative influence on nature.
The man’s ability to harness concentrated energy resources has been responsible for the surge in the material standard of living in many countries during the current century. Most significant of these have been the fossil fuels – coal, natural gas and petroleum. If the remaining reserves of these non renewable energy resources were huge compared to the demand, most probably EA be useless. However, this is not the case, they are being rapidly depleted. This threatens further gain in material standard of living and the sustainability of the existing level in the future generations.
Energy is considered by some analyst as an evaluation measure more fundamental than money. Wherever money flows in an economic system, the flow of resources in the opposite direction can be interpreted in terms of energy; each entails an energy cost that can be calculated. For instance money paid on land, labor and materials used in production. Every interaction in the natural system also has an energy interpretation.
In our last topics it is evident that environmental impacts cannot be adequately monetilized. As a result, many kinds of public actions of importance are justified on various kind of cost benefit ratios based on money in such a way as to ignore the important values not part of the money economy. Odum suggests that since energy is fundamental and pervasive than money, perhaps the energetic common denominator can be employed to evaluate all uses in the same terms. This will help planners protect the public interest and develop patterns for the energy networks that are best for mans survival.
Using EA as a comprehensive evaluation method, the cost of land for a highway can be measured as reduced plant production (e.g. in kilocalories) caused by the land transformation; the cost of material can be measured in (kilocalories of) petroleum, coal etc used to extract process and transport the materials to the site; the labour cost represented by the food energy needed to sustain it. Pollution can also be energized example in the book.
NB; the indirect energy consequences should be counted as well as the direct. For instance, energy required to auto transportation. To sum the diverse energy consequences of the action all impacts must be transformed into a uniform measure. There are many alternatives, tons of coals, kilowatt hours of electricity, kilocalories of petroleum etc. however choosing a single topic is the first step, reason being a kilocalorie of petroleum is not equal to that of coal. There are differences in quality among energy forms in the sense that a unit of each is not capable of doing the same amount of work. Therefore after choosing a uniform measure eg kilocalories of petroleum. The diverse energy measures are translated in terms of it using conversion factors. Eg to measure electricity in kilocalories of petroleum, the kilowatt hours of electricity would be converted to kilocalories and then multiplied by 3.5. an example of energy analysis in a water project in the book pg 175.
Critique of EA as an Evaluation Methodology
Though the arguments supporting EA have a great deal of force, as a comprehensive evaluation method, it is more an idea than a developed methodology at this point. Its strongest advocates favor it for environmental reasons but still on the same ground it has serious flaws. E.g. people may prefer preserving a particular rare plant as opposed to a common tree but the common tree might produce more energy.
Man created erosion on mountainside would be scored as a negative energy impact measured by the loss in plant production yet over the very long term erosion has created a fertile valley and plains and carved the spectacular natural landscape that all enjoy
The accept-reject criterion: example of the water project- should the project be accepted if the energy produced (gained) exceeds the energy required (lost). If so, any but the most ill-conceived hydroelectric project would be built; the energy required is typically a minute fraction the energy produced. Most construction projects cause net energy losses e.g. housing projects.
This shows the EA should not be viewed as a comprehensive evaluation methodology. All consequences should be considered not only the energy implications. No analyst have shown how it would measure social impacts such as education, drug addiction etc.
The ability of EA to measure economic impacts is totally inadequate. Although many money flows in an economy have corresponding energy flows, there is no theory suggesting they ,are proportionate, but overwhelming evidence indicates they are not. E.g. the energy input of a top manager is not greater than that of an unskilled laborer, yet a top manage receives more pay. In addition the energy content of a fuel does not change over time but economic value does.

EA as an Evaluation Tool for Estimating and Representing Energy Impacts
Though it might seem inadequate as a comprehensive methodology but as a tool for estimating energy impacts it is important. It is most seen today by researchers as a tool for calculating energy requirements.
It applications to public policy: can be distinguished according to energy conservation and energy development studies. Energy conservation seeks to determine the energy required for different production technologies, materials, products and services so that people could reduce their energy-intensive and energy wasting actions and develop energy conserving ways of living. Help answer questions like; book page 177
Its applied to energy development alternatives it is now commonly referred to as net energy analysis (NEA).its purposes is to compute the energy requirements of developments options and compare them to the energy gains. The difference between energy gained and energy required is net energy.
In calculating energy requirements for any of the conservation measures as well as development options, analyst don’t include labour or land as described earlier.