Energy Policy Scenarios to 2050
5.2. Scenario 2: Elephant
5.2.1. Africa (Figure 5-6)
Governments adopt policies and act to ensure energy security (diversifying domestic resources, controlling exports, and securing imports), thereby improving Availability. A high sense of nationalism and thus strong incentives ensure the development of domestic capabilities. This is constrained in cases where governments do not have the financial capacity to fund energy infrastructure, while the private sector is at an early stage of development and unable to meet the challenge of financing these projects. Transfer of technology and know-how is relatively constrained because of low international cooperation, and the role of international institutions and agencies in driving aid programmes is less effective. In the long-term, there is an accelerated exhaustion of energy resources due to low cooperation and limited financial resources. Poverty continues to rise but higher government involvement ensures initiatives to facilitate access to energy for most people. Acceptability is not high on the priority list of governments.
5.2.2. Asia (Figure 5-7)
Proactive government policies encourage the deployment of large electricity supply options, such as nuclear, especially in China and India, although within the limits of a low cooperation environment. Decentralised solutions based on renewables improve Accessibility and Availability. Market reforms facilitate development of power distribution systems, enhancing Accessibility. Energy demand for fossil fuels decelerates due to slower GDP growth and government intervention that leads to improved Availability. Top priority goes to sustainable energy security and governments intervene to promote the use of cleaner fuels with less carbon. In that sense, Acceptability improves although the level of improvement depends on the level of international cooperation.
5.2.3. Europe (Figure 5-8)
More government engagement stimulates and supports the emergence and growth of "national champions" companies in the energy sector. Strong bilateral trade agreements are attempted within Europe. This concentration of resources drives improvement in Availability and Acceptability through the first period. However, governments on their own cannot drive sustained improvements in Accessibility or Availability. This needs the direct support and contribution of the private sector. This is not forthcoming in this scenario and Accessibility and Availability decline again. Over the longer term, there is no change in performance on these goals. Acceptability improves slightly due to the more direct intervention of government and the well-established position of Europe as a leader in performance against this goal.
5.2.4. Latin America and the Caribbean (Figure 5-9)
The high level of intervention by government has an initial positive impact on Accessibility; however, this cannot be sustained without cooperation. More government engagement is responsible for the viability of important projects, resulting in a degree of self-sufficiency, and consequently, security of supply. Government engagement also stimulates research and development of local technology, although costs are frequently high, both in terms of management as well as final products. The absence of private sector participation and relative isolation is responsible for relative technological backwardness and absence of investment in the mitigation and offsetting of environmental impacts. Artificially set tariffs prejudice business, including state-owned entities.
5.2.5. North America (Figure 5-10)
In this region, the high level of engagement by government together with the low cooperation ends up displacing private sector initiatives. Government does not have the capacity to substitute for private enterprise and the performance of infrastructure generally declines with negative consequences for Availability in the middle of the period. There is some recovery toward the end as government builds capacity and moves further up the learning curve. Acceptability declines during the middle periods because of low cooperation. Government is unable to sustain historic levels of performance without the cooperation of the private sector. Toward the end of the period, government intervenes with strong legislation forcing a return to the 2005 levels of Acceptability, but there is no further improvement.