Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
537
Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016(India)
R. K. BOSE
ABSTRACT
impact on energy consumption, pollution emission and vice versa. Pollutants considered for
this study are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
oxides (NOx), sulphur dioxide (S02) and suspended particulate matter (SPM) which are the
emissions caused by combustion or automation.
This paper provides a comprehensive and
systematic analysis of energy and pollution
problems interconnected with the economic
structure, by using a multi-objective sectoral
end-use model for addressing regional energy
policy issues. The multi-objective model proposed for the study is a "linear goal programming (LG P)" technique of analysing a
"reference energy system (RES)" in a framework within which alternative policies and
technical strategies may be evaluated. The
model so developed has further been tested for
the city of Delhi (India) for the period 1985- 86,
and a scenario analysis has been carried out by
assuming different policy options.
Keywords: energy, e c o n o m y , environm e n t , goal p r o g r a m m i n g , reference energy s y s t e m , Delhi.
BACKGROUND
U r b a n i z a t i o n is a r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t b u t by
far the m o s t d o m i n a n t social t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
of o u r times. T h e w o r l d h a s fast t r a n s f o r m e d
itself into a n u r b a n society, a n d by 1985
n e a r l y 2 billion p e o p l e (41% of the t o t a l population) w e r e living in u r b a n s e t t l e m e n t s [1].
T h i s r a p i d p a c e of t h e u r b a n i z a t i o n p r o c e s s
a n d t h e different forms of u r b a n g r o w t h p r e s e n t
s e r i o u s c h a l l e n g e s to the e n e r g y s e c t o r in financial, e c o n o m i c , t e c h n o l o g i c a l a n d environm e n t a l terms. T h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of u r b a n i z a t i o n
~ Elsevier Sequoia/Printed in The Netherlands
538
on the energy sector is therefore concerned
with two major current debates in public policy in affluent societies. One is the widespread
concern with the quality of the natural environment, which is degrading. A second debate
concerns the adequacy of energy resources to
meet the requirements of the growing service
needs in an urban economy. Increased energy
consumption entails increased outputs of potentially polluting "residuals" (sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, carbon
monoxide, etc.). Thus the production, distribution, conversion and use of all forms of energy
are inherently and heavily associated with
environmental impacts. Since a significant
part of the shortfalls in environmental quality
in contemporary societies derive from energy
use, issues of "trade-off" between additional
energy supplies and environmental quality
frequently arise. In the context of this intimate association between the economy, environment and energy, recent developments in
energy and natural resources have raised a
number of analytical issues that may be
grouped into three classes [2]:
(1) the effects on the economy (and the
policies) to facilitate the transition from
cheap or abundant energy and a reliance on
oil and gas to more expensive sources of energy;
(2) the trade-off between additional or
lower-cost energy for environmental quality;
(3) the incidence of the costs incurred in
the trade-off decisions in different socioeconomic groups in society.
539
OBJECTIVES
The broad objective of the study is to develop a linear goal programming (LGP) model
by analysing the reference energy system
(RES) for satisfying the "best" mix of fuels
required to meet at least the basic demand of
different economic sectors in an urban area of
India. While doing so, three major goals are
addressed in some ordinal preference by prioritizing them under different scenarios. The
three goals are to minimize:
(1) emission of pollutants in the atmosphere with respect to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards;
(2) energy system cost with respect to the
budgetary limit of the total energy expenditure;
540
ove~lah
t plate
~oking range
yser
tmeraion rod
r cooler
r conditioner
loom heater
FIrewood
Charcoal
Coke
Sub-sectors
End-uses
End-use devices
Energy sources
:~:~,
jj
Cooking
~ .
Water heating
.J
Sectors
, Domestic
j , Space heating
LI family
--
1~Space
cooling
.'an
can.bulb
uor.bulb
~
I/ashlng m a c h i n e . ~
ron
"-'~-.~
ad Io.TV,VCR
~efrlgerator
~
Coal
LPG
Kerosene
Dieeel
Petrol
two wheeler
hree wheeler
:vate oar
ubllo oar
~
" ~
~/~
~
\
i3uS
~ _
Furnaoe
oiler
Iotor
kenerstor
Furnace oll
Others
Electricity
vthers
,//i~
, , ' COttOn,textiles
~\:
-,
~
Food p r o d u c t s , \
rooo. heat
~_
.
Transport
//
~
~j_
~ooster pump
IlscellaneoUShops
HI family
Passenger
movement
~\,"
Fuel oll
MI family
Lighting
,\
?
Motive power
~
Chemicals ./,iI
Other, with I l g h t ~ ~
//
Captive power ~
Metal & alloy
Industry
,:/
Pollutants p
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10,
]l.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Firewood
Charcoal
Coke
Coal
LPG
Kerosene
Diesel
Petrol
Furnace oil
Fuel oil
Electricity
SO2
CO
NOx
SPM
End-uses j
1.
2.
3.
4.
5,
6.
Cooking
Water heating
Space heating
Space cooling
Lighting
Other electric
appliances
Subsectors s
Sectors S
1. Low-income family
2. Middle-income family
3. High-income family
1. Domestic
4. Low-income family
5, Middle-income family
6. High-income family
2. Passenger
transport
7. Passenger movement
8. Process heating
9. Motive power
10. Others including
lighting
11. Captive power
12. Public lighting
13. Public water works
and sewage pumping
14. Miscellaneous
15. Commercial
16. All other end-uses
together in urban
establishments
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Food products
Cotton textiles
Chemicals
Metal and alloy
Others
3. Manufacturing
industry
4. Services and
commercial
541
x!;) =
- a n n u a l per-capita r e q u i r e m e n t of the
ith e n e r g y s o u r c e for the jth end-use
d e m a n d expressed in 103 k c a l / p e r s o n
in the s th subsector; s = 1, 2 , . . . 6, 12
a n n u a l r e q u i r e m e n t of the /th e n e r g y
s o u r c e per u n i t of v a l u e added (va) for
the j t h end-use d e m a n d expressed in
103kcal/Re va in the s th subsector;
s = 7 , 8 . . . . 11
Parameters
For e a c h feasible c o m b i n a t i o n (i, j), i =
1, 2 . . . . 11 and j = 1, 2 . . . . 16, let us d e n o t e by
a!~) the e n e r g y d e m a n d coefficient corresponding to the decision v a r i a b l e xl~). D e p e n d i n g
u p o n a p a r t i c u l a r subsector, these coefficients
are defined differently as given below:
a(8)
ij
~-
u(8)
j
---
bij --
-levelized
annual
t(s) =
(8)
c ij =
-total p e r s o n p o p u l a t i o n expressed in
10 6 persons in the s th subsector;
s = 1 , 2 . . . . 6,12
a n n u a l v a l u e added expressed in 10 6
R u p e e s v a l u e added in the s ts subsector; s = 7 , 8 , . . . 1 1
m a r k e t price of the i th e n e r g y s o u r c e
expressed in Rs/103kcal in the s th
subsector; s = 7, 8 . . . . 11
*i
Vehicles
Appliances
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
2-wheeler
3-wheeler
Car
Taxi
11.1
11.2
11.4
11.5
11.6
11.7
Immersion rod
Geyser
Water cooler
Air-conditioner
Incan. bulb
Fluor. bulb
542
(6)
i E K*(J)
Finally,
CONSTRAINTS
_(8) _(~)
tt ij " ij
" (~)
Uj
(1)
i e K*(J)
Domestic sector
(j, s) E~ = {(j, s): (1, 1), (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 1),
(2,
(4,
(5,
(6,
(7)
For
Transport sector
(8)
(3)
Industrial sector
(j, s) E3 = {(j, s): (8, 7), (8, 8), (8, 9), (8, 10),
(8, 11), (9, 7), (9, 8), (9, 9),
(9, 10), (9, 11), (10, 7),
(10, 8), (10, 9), (10, 10),
(10, 11), (11, 7), (11, 8),
(11, 9), (11, 10), (11, 11)} (4)
For
(9)
543
(9) are for different types of passenger vehicles. In the LGP setup the constraint eqn. (7)
is to be written as
aij(s) t(s)~c(s)
- --ij + d * -
(10)
= bij
-t(s)y(s)'-ij <
i = 1, 2, . . . 11
ri
(11)
jK(i)
~(s)~(s)
-
-ij
q- di
. . . . .
-
d,
= ri
(12)
j e I';[(i)
i e K*(J)
_(s) X i (s)
j
Uij
e(S)
(13)
fors=l,
2; j ~ E g = ( 1 , 2 , 3 . . . . 6)
(14)
(15)
for s = 7 , 8 , 9 , 1 0 , 1 1 ;
jeEaa=(8,9,10,11)
(16)
There are nine constrained inequalities in
eqn. (13), of which two correspond to the domestic energy budget in eqn. (14), two to the
transport energy budget in eqn. (15) and the
last five to the industrial energy budget in
eqn. (16).
In the LGP setup, the constraint eqn. (13) is
written as
c,j(~) x (s)
ij + d*- - d *+ = e (s)
i K*(J)
(17)
where, d*- (or d *+) denotes the energy under(or over-) expenditure in the s th sector.
5. A i r p o l l u t i o n l o a d i n g
The total annual emission of the p t h pollutant due to the burning or automotive processes of different fuels is to be kept as low as
possible with respect to its permissible or safe
loading level in the atmosphere annually. In
other words, total emission of the pth-pollut a n t annually should be minimized with respect to the annual safe loading level.
12
qij
p = 1, 2, 3, 4
s = l (i,j) K'(P)
(18)
There are four constrained inequalities in eqn.
(18), each of which corresponds to the four
different pollutants SO2, CO, NO~ and SPM.
In the LGP setup, the constraint eqn. (18) is
to be written as
12
~,
.~a!e'~)t(~)~
~ _,j + d'p- - d'p = v (p)
(19)
s = 1 (i,j) K'(P)
544
6. Non-negativity constraint
We have here the natural constraints
x (s)
(20)
GOAL FORMULATIONS
= 1,2 . . . . 45
G2 is d[;
G~ is dT;
= 46,47 . . . . 56
G4 is d [ ;
= 57,58 . . . . 67
G~ is d/~;
= 68,69 . . . . 76
d[;
= 77,78,79,80.
G 6 is
1,2 . . . . 45
P1
P2
Pa
P4
P5
I
II
III
Ga > G1
G:3 > G~
G:, > G~
G~
G~
G4
G6
G~
Gs
G4
G4
G6
G,~
G2
G2
545
Scenario H
Minimize Z = P I ( A - + B - ) + P 2 E +
+ P3D+ + P4C+ + P~A +
Objective w e i g h t i n g w i t h i n priority g r o u p i n g
A - = ~ wTdF
i= I
45
A+= E w;d;
i=l
45 subgoals in G2
56
B-=
w[-di-
i = 46
11 subgoals in G3
67
C += ~
w?-dJ-
i =57
11 subgoals in G4
76
D+=
E+=
8O
where
45
56
w/-+ ~
i = 1
w/-=1
i=46
45
67
76
80
i=57
i=68
i=77
Objective function
The structures of the objective function under three different scenarios after assigning
weights to the goal deviations in Table 2 are:
Scenario I
Minimize Z = P I ( A - + B - ) + P2D +
+ P3E + + P4C + + PsA +
(21)
(22)
Scenario I I I
Minimize Z = P , ( A - + B - ) + P2C +
+ P3D + + P4 E + P~A +
(23)
SCENARIO RESULTS
P1 = 0, in all the scenarios. This means G1
and G 3 are fully met. In other words, each of
the sectoral end-use energy demands have at
least been met, in the presence of full utilization of the selected domestic electrical appliances and different modes of vehicle available
in Delhi during 1985-86.
Ph ~ 0 for h = 2, 3, 4, 5 in all the scenarios.
This indicates none of the other four goals G2,
G4, G~ and GG are fully met.
Now to understand which subgoals in G2,
G4, G5 and G~ are responsible for under-attainment of these goals in all the three scenarios,
Table 3 presents a detailed analysis. From the
definition of goal types, any positive deviational variable, if it is non-zero for the goal
G2, is a gain in the overall system. Whereas,
any negative deviational variable, if it is a
Kerosene
Diesel
Petrol
Furnace oil
Fuel oil
Electricity
Expenditure: LI: domestic
6
9
11
13
14
18
20
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Rs/Re va
Rs/Re va
Rs/Re va
Rs/Re va
Ils]Re va
103 tonne
103 tonne
103 tonne
10a tonne
Rs/person
Rs/person
Rs/person
109 kcal
10a kcal
Rs[person
109 kcal
109 kcal
109 kcal
10s kcal
10a pkm/person
109 kcal
10s kcal
109 kcal
109 keal
109 kcal
103 kcal]person
103 kcal/person
10a pkm/person
10a kcal[person
103 kcal/person
10a kcal/person
10a keal/person
Unit
0.51
0.68
0.47
0.81
0.13
16
255
42
22
448
365
943
30
3353
242
1940
6253
2286
1514
4
1608
355
707
535
1340
14
26
4
90
27
380
42
Goal
0
0
0
0
0
0
91
0.04
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
5170
0
1514
0
1608
355
0
535
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.20
0.42
0.10
0.31
0.21
11
0
0
13
285
0
0
0
5532
19
1601
0
976
0
2
0
0
2311
0
373
0
0.36
0
244
0
762
0
0
0
0
0
0
131
0
0.93
0
0
0
30
0
0
688
5170
0
1514
0
1608
355
707
535
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d-
d+
Scenario II
Scenario I
All the figures have been rounded off to the nearest integer value except for figures less t h a n unity.
P a r a m e t e r description
Eqn.
No.
Under-attainment of goals under three different scenarios showing p e r c e n t a g e gain or loss in each goal
TABLE 3
92
0
0
0
0
0
0.63
0.29
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
477
0.29
0.72
0.15
798
4671
359
0
0
0
0
0
0
5057
7523
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4816
0
0
0
853
2
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
6128
0
2193
0
237
d ~
0
2
41
0.68
0.25
11
0.41
0.62
0.13
479
8768
0
0
0
5523
7526
0
0
825
0.01
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
164
2193
0
d*
Scenario III
36
0.10
100
100
83
100
38
100
100
201
62
36
32
78
223
24
21
38
168
69
190
28
84
192
71
80
91
165
3113
36
(%)
Loss
38
57
106
5]
77
127
0.07
182
8071
(%)
Gain
39
62
151
3112
37
457
(%)
Loss
Scenario IlI
107
2405
51
100
100
83
35
100
100
100
100
127
17
8071
569
(%)
Gain
Scenario I1
178
1218
64
165
43
28
83
327
(%)
270
Loss
(%)
Gain
Scenario I
Energy
rod
kWh/person
kWh/person
kWh/person
2.28
46.19
57.08
37.16
38.98
LI*
Scenario
44.12
9.74
77.16
43.29
68.65
160.21
113.33
MI
above.
appliances
f a m i l y i n c o m e o v e r Rs. 54 000.
mentioned
with annual
**"Others"
HI = High-income household
Others**
fluorescent tube
Electricity:
Electricity
bulb
incandescent
Electricity:
air-conditioner
Electricity:
Kerosene
Lighting
kWh/person
w a t e r cooler
Electricity:
kWh/person
litres/person
kWh/person
fan
Electricity:
kWh/person
kWh/person
Space cooling
geyser
Space heating
instant
litres/person
kWh/person
Kerosene
Electricity:
kWh]person
Electricity
kg/person
kg/person
litres/person
LPG
Kerosene
LPG
kg]person
kg/person
Unit
Firewood
immersion
Appliance
Soft coke
source
399.36
372.15
128.97
145.29
65.18
washing
307.59
311.55
13.34
23.63
machines,
II
78.23
21.08
160.21
194.61
113.33
131.44
44.12
.
46.77
MI
65.18
141.43
307.59
331.29
53.09
188.22
123.59
128.97
HI
57.08
83.14
3036.87
LI
Scenario
13.34
under
57.08
83.14
3036.87
142.39
LI
Scenario
i n t h e domestic s e c t o r o f D e l h i d u r i n g 1 9 8 5 - 86
1162.43
HI
m i x o f e n e r g y s o u r c e s f o r d i f f e r e n t e n d - u s e s i n t h r e e income c a t e g o r i e s
Electricity:
Electricity
Water heating
Cooking
End-use
TABLE
160.21
166.97
113.33
10.91
44.12
78.23
122.51
28.14
63.11
MI
9.78
141.43
307.59
52.77
331.29
-
188.22
348.19
128.97
2.13
101.33
HI
III
Bus
2 wheeler
3 wheeler
Car
Taxi
Diesel
Petrol
Petrol
Petrol
Petrol
litres/person
litres/person
litres/person
litres/person
litres/person
Unit
17.94
7.41
LI
Scenario
25.96
16.37
MI
10.99
41.42
34.88
22.42
14.30
HI
for passenger
160.30
123.54
LI
Scenario
II
34.66
7.68
14.62
--
MI
Energy
Diesel
Captive
power
litres/Re va
kWh/Re va
kg/Re va
kg/Re va
litres/Re va
litres/Re va
kWh/Re va
Coal
LPG
Furn. oil
Fuel oil
Electricity
Electricity
kg/Re va
kg/Re va
Unit
Charcoal
Coke
SOUrCe
O t h e r and
light
Motive
power
Process
heating
End-use
0.01
0.05
0.45
0.12
Food
neg.
0.05
0.44
0.43
Cotton
Scenario I
neg.
0.05
0.44
0.06
Chemical
0.003
0.05
0.41
0.46
Metal
0.002
0.02
0.15
0.11
Others
0.01
0.05
0.45
0.05
Food
neg.
0.05
0.44
0.17
Cotton
S c e n a r i o II
neg.
0.05
0.44
0.03
Chemical
0.003
0.05
0.41
0.18
Metal
0.002
0.02
0.15
0.05
Others
232.96
51.85
0.01
0.05
0.45
0.11
Food
neg.
0.05
0.44
0.62
Cotton
S c e n a r i o Ill
1.16
72.65
L!
Scenario
16.98
12.79
Mt
neg.
0.05
0.01
0.44
0.07
Chemical
II|
19.10
HI
Scenario results on a n n u a l mix of energy sources for four m a j o r end-uses in five types of manufacturing industries in Delhi d u r i n g 1985- 86
TABLE 6
Vehicle mode
Energy
source
Scenario results on annual mix of energy sources for meeting travel demand
sector
TABLE
0.003
0.05
0.41
0.14
0.(17
0.15
Metal
0.002
0.02
0.15
0.05
Others
34.59
14.71
Ht
in t h e transport
549
TABLE 7
Scenario results on annual mix of energy sources for different end-uses in the services and commercial sector in Delhi
during 1985-86
End-use
Energy
source
Unit
Scenario
I
Street lighting
Water works and
sewage pumping
Miscellaneous
Commercial
Others*
II
III
Electricity
Electricity
kWh/person
kWh/person
8.00
39.81
8.00
39.81
8.00
39.81
Electricity
Electricity
Firewood
LPG
Kerosene
kWh]person
kWh/person
kg/person
kg/person
litres/person
8.90
120.11
8.90
120.11
2.86
-
8.90
120.11
0.03
5.90
2.86
*"Others" include (i) hotels and restaurants, (ii) hospitals, (iii) laundries, and (iv) any other establishment where all types
of fuels are consumed. Where in the case of all other end-uses only electricity is consumed.
non-zero for the goal G1, is a loss. Both the
goals G, and G2 are expressed in the same
equation numbers 1 to 45. The appearance of
a non-zero value for a positive deviational
variable is a gain for goals G4, G5 and G~.
These are expressed in equation numbers 46
to 80.
The optimum mix of different fuels required
to meet G1 in the presence of G3 in the four
major economic sectors of Delhi city, namely,
domestic, passenger transport, manufacturing
industry and services and commercial is estimated and presented separately in Tables 4- 7,
respectively.
550
TABLE 8
Actual availability vis-a-vis optimum annual requirements* of different fuels under three different scenarios
Energy
Source
Unit
Firewood
tonne
Charcoal
tonne
Soft coke
tonne
Coal
tonne
LPG
tonne
Kerosene
klitres
Diesel
klitres
Petrol
klitres
Furnace oil
klitres
Fuel oil
klitres
Electricity
MWh
Total
Gcal
Actual
consumption
in 1985-86
Scenario
I
340
(8.07)
51
(1.78)
109
(3.55)
121
(2.69)
114
(6.73)
177
(9.74)
579**
(31.39)
205
(11.47)
145
(7.60)
3
(0.15)
3986
(16.83)
19921
(100.00)
II
III
465
(14.04)
0
0
0
146
(7.97)
323
(16.47)
100
(5.03)
293
(15.17)
0
635
(34.98)
114
(5.86)
100
( 5.07)
281
(14.70)
0
10324
(41.32)
9772
(39.39)
21502
(100.00)
21352
(100.00)
340
(7.50)
51
(1.65)
109
(3.30)
121
(2.49)
114
(6.25)
177
(9.04)
133
(6.70)
279
(14.50)
145
(7.06)
3
(0.14)
10313
(41.37)
21453
(100.00)
*Figures outside parentheses are in thousands; figures within parentheses are expressed in percent.
**Including diesel consumed in freight transport.
551
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
1 Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI), New Delhi,
Economic-Environmental Energy Interactions, Modeling and Policy Analysis, Studies in Applied Regional
Science, Vol. 17, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 1980, pp.
40 - 73.