No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The European Energy Outlook to 1985
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 March 2020
Abstract
This article surveys the changes in recent years in the energy plans/forecasts of seventeen West European countries and in the prospects for European energy supplies. Economic growth since the 1975 recession has been slower than foreseen at the time of our similar survey two years ago; expectations concerning growth to 1985 are now also lower, resulting in energy requirements which are below those forecast earlier. The previous ambitious nuclear plans have in many cases been considerably reduces but higher future use of natural gas is planned. Europe's dependence on imported energy may be reducedfrom 64% in 1973 to just over 50% in 1980 and 1985 but seems likely to increase fairly rapidly again later on unless new domestic energy sources are found by then.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1978 National Institute of Economic and Social Research
References
(1) G. F. Ray, ‘European energy prospects,’ National Institute Economic Review, No. 78, November 1976, pp 40-47.
(2) See ‘The “real” price of crude oil’, National Institute Economic Review, No. 82, November 1977, pp 59-61.
(3) We are grateful for the assistance received from economic research institutes in the various European countries, whose active help was invaluable in the preparation of this article.
(4) These are: 1 tonne of crude oil= 1.47 tonnes of coal equivalent (ce); 1 teracalorie of natural gas=143 tonnes ce; and 1,000 kWh of hydro, nuclear or geothermal electricity= 0.123 tonnes ce.
(1) In this context it must be borne in mind that nuclear energy can be converted to coal equivalent in a number of ways, yielding different results. In the 1976 report the countries' own methods were accepted; some of them indicated a higher coal equivalent than the UN method which we have used here for comparability. The reduction shown in the table may therefore be over-estimated in the sense that the earlier plans for nuclear energy, if converted by the UN method, would have given a lower percentage for nuclear contribution. Although this affects some of the countries, the direction of the change is in all cases correct (i.e. the reduction is real) but in a few cases less than indicated in the table.