Global Energy Trends – BP Statistical Review 2014

The 2014 BP Statistical Review of World Energy was published yesterday updating global energy statistics to the end of 2013. The home page is here and the XL workbook can be downloaded here.

I have made a few charts and make the following key observations:

  • Global primary energy supply has continued to grow, mainly fossil fuels (FF), mainly coal. FF supply was up 183 million tonnes oil equivalent (mtoe) in 2013 while new renewable supply was up 42 mtoe from 2012.
  • In 2003, FF accounted for 87% of global primary energy consumption. In 2013, FF accounted for 87% of global primary energy consumption. This is testimony to the absolute failure of energy policies aimed at reducing CO2 emissions.
  • In 2003, new renewables (wind, solar, geothermal, biofuels etc) accounted for 0.82% of total primary energy and by 2013 this had grown to 2.69%. In 2003, nuclear power accounted for 6.01% and this fell to 4.40% in 2013. The 1.87% growth in share of new renewables almost matches the 1.61% fall in the share of nuclear power. On the CO2 account, low emissions nuclear power has been replaced by low emissions renewable energy. The actual energy substitutions are a little more complex.
  • Oil consumption has been on a gently rising plateau since 2005 (Figure 1) and oil is declining in importance in the global energy mix (Figure 2). The fall in oil’s share has been picked up by coal and the only simple way for this substitution to occur is for oil fired power generation to close. Once all oil fired generation has been closed, expect severe upwards pressure on the oil price.

Figure 1 Global energy consumption growth has continued unabated into 2013 which is a good thing for the short-term welfare of the growing population but perhaps not so good for the environment in a broad sense. 

Figure 2 Same data as in Figure 1 but normalised to 100%. The long term decline of oil as a fuel is plain to see. The importance of FF (oil+gas+coal) has been constant for the last 25 years. This chart shows quite clearly how on a CO2 account, new renewables are substituting mainly for declining nuclear.

Figure 3 The share of global energy consumption in 2013. FFs dominate with nuclear and hydro making up most of the rest. In 2013 FF had 87% share the same as in 2003 (Figure 4). Oil has declined since 2003 (Figure 4) from 37 to 33%. Coal has increased from 26 to 30%. In 2003 nuclear was 6% and has declined to 4% in 2013. New renewables are in part substituting oil (biofuel) and nuclear (geothermal, wind and solar), though the real picture will be more complex.

Figure 4 The share of global energy consumption in 2003. 

This entry was posted in Energy, Political commentary and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Global Energy Trends – BP Statistical Review 2014

  1. Alister Hamilton says:

    I was looking at UK natural gas production data in the 2014 BP Statistical Review and it seemed a bit odd to me.

    A reader over at Ron’s Peak Oil Barrel site pointed out that the data is shifted by 3 years.

    • Euan Mearns says:

      Its a bit more complex than a three year shift. In the 2014 report, the years 1995, 1996, 1997 are repeated in 1998, 1999, 2000. That results in a 3 year displacement that holds good until 2010. But then it is difficult to see where the 2011, 2012 and 2013 data come from. Kind of shakes your confidence in everything.

  2. Dennis Coyne says:

    Hi Euan,

    I would think that the UK government has statistics on Natural Gas production, could these be compared with the BP numbers?

  3. Dennis Coyne says:

    Year ——————–BCM
    2008 ————— 75.92
    2009 ————— 65.08
    2010 ————— 62.30
    2011 ————— 49.33
    2012 ————— 42.39

    The statistics above are gross production for natural Gas Production from the UK government Agency, the report is DUKES Table 4.3.

    The numbers are fairly close to the 2013 Statistical Review, hopefully BP will correct the error in the 2014 report.

  4. Willem Post says:


    It would be good to add some graphs on CO2 emissions by these various sources to show:

    – how they keep increasing with no end in sight
    – how all those investments in RE did not make one iota of difference regarding GW, other than create a grand illusion and higher energy costs in some countries such as Germany, Denmark, etc. Yikes!!

    World CO2 emissions (million metric tons) were:

    22,700 in 1990; Kyoto
    30,720 in 2006
    31,450 in 2007
    32,190 in 2008
    33,080 in 2009
    33,730 in 2010
    34,760 in 2011
    35,600 in 2012; 57% greater than Kyoto, 22 years later!
    43,200 in 2035, projected by IEA.

  5. Dennis Coyne says:

    Hi Euan,

    The UK government data does match pretty well with the BP 2013 data through 2012

  6. James Murray says:

    The best estimate of global CO2 emissions and their sources are put together by the Global Carbon Project led by Corrine Le Quere at East Anglia. The rate of increase of CO2 continued with no change but the increased emissions are more from coal and from China and India.

    Here is the link.

  7. Euan, many thanks for the excellent charts and clear analysis on this site, very helpful to understanding and communication. One request, could you please expand the tag cloud to include China, Turkey, world, etc, to make it easier to find the relevant articles in the rapidly growing archive? Also, usa is listed, but the excellent analysis of America energy independence is not to be found so easily…

    • Euan Mearns says:

      Claire, thanks! I’m not sure I know how to expand the tag cloud. Two ways to find articles you know about. The first is to use the search facility top right. I just searched on “american energy” and found the article straight away. The second is to use Google and to prefix any search with “euan”. I just searched on “euan american energy” and the article comes top. There is also the “Top Posts Index” – which unfortunately is out of date.

  8. Hello Euan
    The BP oil production data appear to have many mistakes. Have a look at Peru oil production for example. This is supposed to include NGLs but it does not make much sense. From the year 2000 the NGL numbers seem to be erratically included for a number of countries after BP modified many of the 2000 to 2011 histories in last year’s Review. I contacted them at the time but they did not seem to care or understand. Have you an opinion on this?

  9. Hello Euan
    The BP numbers have many other mistakes. Have a look at Peru oil production for example. Oil production is supposed to include NGLs but does not make any sense to me after 2003. I contacted them last year when they modified their Review 2012 history data from 2000 to 2011 (pointing out that the NGL numbers seemed to be erratically included) but they did not seem to care and/or understand. Do you have an opinion on the oil production values?

    • Euan Mearns says:

      Mike, table shows Peru oil production. The 2013 and 2014 review data are the same. But as you point out, if you go back in time a bit to 2010 there is a change in the post-1999 data. I’ve spent a lot of time over the years plotting BP, EIA, IEA and JODI data. By and large there is a high degree of consistency with occasional discrepancies. NGLs are frequently involved as national governments switch categorisation. From memory Algeria is one country with reporting discrepancy and Russia is another. But I can’t recall if that was BP or EIA data.

      Reporting standards are one thing, the UK gas production data is a straight data error. I once asked a guy at DECC where BP got its UK numbers from. He could direct me to a guy in DECC who was tasked with reporting UK stats to JODI but didn’t know where BP and the other agencies got their data from.

  10. Claire Barnes says:

    Yes can search, and thank you for having a name sufficiently distinctive to help google! In some blogs the tag/label cloud offers a detailed index, eg, which would be helpfu to new readers – if it’s possible with wordpress.

    Regarding the anomalies in BP’s data, the Malaysian figures have also been undergoing major revisions every year for at least the last six, sometimes dramatically changing the message they convey. I first wrote about this in 2012, in an article entitled ‘the imprecision of vital statistics‘: the magnitude of the difference is shown in charts there. Two years later the historic statistics on oil and gas, production and consumption all continue to shift, and I am none the wiser on the reasons for the changes.

  11. Pingback: Weekoverzicht Peakoil week 25 | Stichting Peakoil Nederland

  12. Pingback: Links 21st June 2014 | AQONEMAKI

Comments are closed.