The Analysis of Long-term Energy Scenarios for Thailand
Student: Srichattra Chaivongvilan
Principal supervisor: Prof. Deepak Sharma
Completion year: 2012
Thesis abstract
This research analyses the long-term impacts of alternative energy policy options for Thailand up to the year 2050, with a view to identify a policy pathway that would meet the country's energy demand in a way that ensures economic prosperity and maximizes social gains. The three energy policy options (called scenarios in this research) are: BAU (Business-as-Usual), NP (Nuclear Power) and RE (Renewable Energy). The BAU scenario represents a continuation of the existing policy trends while the NP and RE scenarios reflect dominant foci of the Thai government’s energy policy settings for the coming decades. For example, the NP scenario emphasises the introduction of nuclear power, and the RE scenario — the promotion of renewable energy. The key drivers for each scenario include economic growth, energy diversity, energy import dependency, and CO2 emissions.
The economy-wide impacts of these scenarios are analysed in this research using a comprehensive methodological framework that consists of an energy optimisation model (MESSAGE model) — for assessing the country's primary and final energy requirements; and an energy-oriented input-output model — for assessing economy-wide impacts, in terms of sectoral outputs, income, employment, and energy and CO2 intensities.
The analysis suggests that if the current policy trends continue over the next decades, by 2050 Thailand would face nearly a four-fold increase in primary energy requirements (from 104 · Mtoe in 2005, to 430 Mtoe in 2050) and at five-fold increase in CO2 emissions (from 190 Mt in 2005, to 893 Mt in 2050). The country's import dependency will increase to 85 percent by 2050 (from 55 percent in 2005). Such outcomes are likely to negatively impact the security of energy supply and cause significant environmental damage (as, in the BAU scenario, the country's energy system stays essentially dominated by fossil fuels). The NP and RE scenarios, this research suggests, have the potential to reduce primary energy requirements by 16 and 32 percent, respectively. Further, while the NP scenario could contribute to a 5 percent increase in energy imports (in comparison with the imports in the BAU scenario), the RE scenario is likely to result in a 10 percent decline in energy imports. The CO2 emissions, in 2050, would decline in the NP scenario by approximately 3 percent but increase in the RE scenario by about 4 percent — as compared with the emissions in the BAU scenario. Further, the analyses suggest that while the economy-wide impacts of these policies (expressed in terms of economic output, wages and salaries, employment) are likely to be marginal at the national level, they are likely to be varied, and, in several cases — significant, at the sectoral levels. For example, the research suggests that the main electricity sector is likely to be a major beneficiary- by 2050, its wages and salaries, and employment will increase (in comparison with the BAU scenario) by 2.7 and 2.6 percent in the NP scenario, and by 10.0, and 10.1 percent in the RE scenario. Within the energy sector, coal and lignite sectors will however suffer declines in wages and salaries, and employment of 29.7 and 33.3 percent in the NP scenario, and 28.1 and 22.2 percent in the RE scenario.
These findings could be of significant value for the Thai policy makers as they endeavour to develop long-term energy policies for Thailand. Of particular interest to them will be the insights relating to the tradeoffs between energy and economic attributes, and aggregate and disaggregated analyses. This research also constitutes a fine example that demonstrates the significance of undertaking comprehensive analyses that cohesively embraces diverse dimensions of policy development, namely, economic prosperity, jobs, energy security, import dependency, environment.