Continuing inefficiency
Viedokļi
The inefficiencies in Latvia are yet another consequence of political graft. The focus has been on creating a system whereby the state is obliged to buy in 'green' energies (mini-hydro and -wind stations) rather than reforming and making more efficient consumption.
Actually the double tariff of the small energy producers is a really tiny contributor to the end price. Our problem is, that we don't use more local energy sources like wood pulp (and we are stalling the nuclear power plant project), instead we import coal and gas from Russia.
And, of course, as the author suggests, the housing - lots of it from soviet times with insufficient insulation, if any at all and transmission - ok, we don't have snow and ice where the pipes go, but is it really worth it?
And, of course, as the author suggests, the housing - lots of it from soviet times with insufficient insulation, if any at all and transmission - ok, we don't have snow and ice where the pipes go, but is it really worth it?
To better explain, interpret and understand relationship GDP vs primary energy consumption bit deeper ( but simple) structural analyses are needed. Cold and wet days would give you idea how much additional energy require comfort and well maintained infrastructure. You rightly mentioned difference and advantage of DK in Nordics. Some climate privilege would have LT vs EST.
But when it comes to industry and service sectors were competition is putting pleasure on cost structure and simultaneously on energy efficiency, states role is limited to energy taxation and introduction of effective competition in supply side. Energy taxation policy of Dombrovskis and his team was awful and unfair. Lot of time and money in state coffers was lost. Unfair I’m saying, because stupid social measures was taken in electricity, not addressing right target groups. What more now is needed is transparency – to illuminate cost structure of customer groups, stop blackmail local energy recourses ( some call them “bad green energy”) and disclose so call “commercial secrets” of regulated natural monopolies. You absolutely right on generating jobs in efficiency enhancing sector, I would ad – in domestic energy resources. Especially in these uncertain times.
But when it comes to industry and service sectors were competition is putting pleasure on cost structure and simultaneously on energy efficiency, states role is limited to energy taxation and introduction of effective competition in supply side. Energy taxation policy of Dombrovskis and his team was awful and unfair. Lot of time and money in state coffers was lost. Unfair I’m saying, because stupid social measures was taken in electricity, not addressing right target groups. What more now is needed is transparency – to illuminate cost structure of customer groups, stop blackmail local energy recourses ( some call them “bad green energy”) and disclose so call “commercial secrets” of regulated natural monopolies. You absolutely right on generating jobs in efficiency enhancing sector, I would ad – in domestic energy resources. Especially in these uncertain times.
Was this article a 1st-April-joke? It is known that the work productivity in Latvia is lower than in other countries. But if so, it takes much more everything "to produce one euro of GDP", not only the electricity! To produce one euro of GDP, Latvians consume much more water, sunflower oil, sugar, cakes, pepper, salt, honey, socks, tires, parfumery and toilett paper. They even consume much more oxygen for breathing. Why Mr. Hansen does not advise us to inhale the air slower, or order to get similar indicators "inhaled air/Euro of GDP" as in Scandinavia?
In particular more toilet paper is needed, as you point out, not least for all the BS that tends to be uttered here... - though I won't put your comment in that category :-)But why just accept such a massive use of energy per 1 EUR of GDP when it is so relatively easy to reduce it and with all the benefits it entails? That's the really pathetic part.
Every one is well aware of the fact that energy efficiency is very bad in Latvia. Apartmens are heated with hot water, which is heated in one place and transported through pipes to places many km further. Waste of energy on the way is inevitable. And we did not invent the system - Russians did. Scandinavians or Germans heat with gas that is transported through pipes to every single building, there loss of energy of corse is close to 0. Heat isolation of the buildings has been issue here for years in every newspaper. Everyone is aware of it and why it does not function - unlike in many other countries here one ownes an appartment not a building. To make changes to the whole building many appartment owners have to agree and as we know they can not do it in Latvia! IMO agreeing is much easier in societies where rich live with rich, poor with poor like in Sweden Denmark where over decades real estate market has producet wealthy areas, middle class areas and working class and immigrant areas, where people of same language, education, lifestyle, often age live together. These people of course can agree on everything. In Latvia one house will have young latvian family of profesionals living in one appartment who bought the flat for 50 000 EUR and still paying the mortgage. Next flat in same house would be inhabited by a russian babushka that got the appartment for free through privatisation, that knows no word Latvian and is counting her last days. How do you want these people to agree on investmens in the building? It is not only difficult, it is nearly impossible thus making the heat isolation thing quit utopic. No wonder that the building heat isolation works are going better in smaller towns like Valmiera where people talk with each other and are same nationality and class.But I liked the point that was expressed already earlier, that a poor country has the same need for air and toilet paper than rich country thus measured per GDP unit all these things will be consumed more in poor countries than rich, it itself does not prove any inefficiencies. But anyway in Latvia inefficiencies are so obvious that no proof is needed.
Eurostat should provide reasonable quality of data.Taking into account the grey economy would not alter the overall picture.
True, Liepajas Metalurgs most likely gobbles a lot of energy - on the other hand, Latvia has a relatively small manufacturing industry compared to the five other countries and this obviously pushes in the other direction, saying that Latvia is EVEN less energy efficient than the numbers indicate.
The gray sector would alter the picture, because energy is much more tightly regulated than, let's say retail, and therefore most of energy used by both the retail that pays taxes and that which is done through the back door would show up in the statistics, whereas only the legal retail contribution to GDP be visible in the statistics. If Estonia has a smaller share of its retail in the gray, its energy consumption per gdp unit will be smaller, won't it?
Some years ago electricity was so cheap, that there was no reason to use it economically.
But You are completely right, that this is potencial sector for new jobs. And not only electricity, but heating as well.
But picture is little bit wrong. Light bolbs are ineficient only if heat from them is wasted or is harmful. But when You heat house with electririty, then light bolb works as another electrical heater.
But You are completely right, that this is potencial sector for new jobs. And not only electricity, but heating as well.
But picture is little bit wrong. Light bolbs are ineficient only if heat from them is wasted or is harmful. But when You heat house with electririty, then light bolb works as another electrical heater.
This is a nice study, but yet - it could be made much more valuable, if we could compare energy consumption per sector of economy (e.g. energy consumption in households, in transportation and in industry). In this case it would make more sense to compare climate - energy use in transportation and industry is only moderately affected by cold weather, but heating bills - very much so. Perhaps we could compare the energy used in transportation. E.g. if we find out that a Danish household spends less to buy fuel for their family car compared with Latvia, then we can dig deeper for a reason (is it because Danish cars are more efficient; or our mileage is bigger; or Danes use more public transportation). It could be a specific policy recommendation. Or, if we find out that Latvians spend more money to heat their apartments than Nordic people (per household or per square meter of their family homes or apartments), then we can find out that Latvians need to use smaller houses (if we are overspending per household), or their existing houses should have better thermal-insulation (if we are overspending per square meter of our living space).
Currently we only know that we are kind-of inefficient, without much knowledge about the areas where there is a potential to make the biggest impact. Inefficiencies are rarely uniform - there are likely some "energy hogs" - some consumption patterns that are mostly responsible for this problem.
Nepiekrītu, ka Latvijas iedzīvotāji nav taupīgi - leģionāru slimības izplatība parāda pretējo ainu.Siltinās mājas ir bezjēdzīgi, ja tajās vairs nedzīvo visi iemītnieki, vai nav skaidra to tālākā nākotne. Ieliktu individuālos siltuma skaitītājus, aina būtu cita. Tagad nav jēgas siltināt, jo tam nav saistības ar siltuma rēķinu.
Lai pievienotu viedokli ⎯
vai
Nākamais raksts
Deviantie krievi (219)
Krieviski runājošie (tālāk - krievi, jo lietotā valoda ir grupas atšķirīgā pazīme) Latvijas politikā un likumdošanā 20 gadus tiek konstruēti kā devianti - sociālā grupa, kuru sabiedrība uzskata par bīstamu.
Vēl par šo tēmu
-
A tale of four countries, part II: Economic policy response to the crisis 6
-
A tale of four different exchange rate experiences 21
-
Too close for comfort 23
-
Lessons (if any…) for Latvia from Belarus’ 2011 devaluations 26
Belarus saw a massive devaluation of its currency in 2011. Now that the macroeconomic impact is...
-
A backdoor into the eurozone? 23