Report on demand-side strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions based on interviews and literature review


In order to stabilise the climate, it is essential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and there is potential for significant reductions on the demand side. Such demand-side reductions do not compromise quality of life, but rather provide climate change co-benefits such as healthy active lifestyles, reduced urban air pollution and improved work/life balance.



While previous IPCC Assessment Reports have focused rather on technical aspects, the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of Working Group 3 (WG3) (2022) focuses on ‘demand, services and social aspects of mitigation’ in Chapter 5. Its Technical Summary (TS) concludes that GHG emissions in three end-use sectors (buildings, land transport and food) could be reduced by 40-70% globally by 2050.

According to Box TS.11 of the IPCC AR6 WG (2022), demand-side mitigation involves five sets of social actors: individuals (e.g., consumption choices, habits), groups and collectives (e.g., social movements, values), corporate actors (e.g., investments, advertising), institutions (e.g., political agency, regulations), and infrastructure actors (e.g., very long-term investments and financing). It points out that the transformative change requires coordinated action across all five sets of actors, using social science insights about intersection of behaviour, culture, institutional and infrastructural changes for policy design and implementation. In Section 5.3 of the IPCC AR6 WG (2022), they focus on mapping the opportunity space and present avoid, shift, and improve choices as means of countermeasures in Table 5.1. These choices are driven by role models and social norms that change through policy and social movements. It also points to the need for appropriate infrastructure designed by urban planners and experts of architecture and transport, appropriate investments, and a political culture that supports demand-side mitigation actions.

According to Dr. Yann Briand of IDDRI, demand-side reduction is very difficult to define because of overlapping strategies and outcomes. Some people define demand-side strategy as changing people’s behaviour. Others think about supply and demand in the energy system. The transport chapter of IPCC AR6 includes a section on systemic change. Systemic change refers to the emergence of new organisational patterns that affect the structure of a system. In the transport sector, most attention to date has focused on vehicle engine and fuel technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it has become important to consider many aspects, including demographic trends, financial and economic systems, urban form, culture and politics. These systemic changes provide an opportunity to decouple greenhouse gas emissions from economic growth.

2. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through Avoid, Shift, and Improve

Strategies to achieve a low carbon/decarbonised system include Avoid, Shift, and Improve. The strategies differ depending on the issue. Taking the transport system as an example, actions that individuals can take include reducing traffic by working from home (Avoid), switching from car to public transport (Shift), and driving more efficient vehicles (Improve). On the other hand, strategies that government agencies and infrastructure stakeholders can take include reducing the volume of travel through compact cities (Avoid), increasing the number of people switching to public transport by improving public transport systems (Shift), and introducing low-carbon vehicles for public transport systems (Improve) (Low Carbon Society Scenario Project 2011 & 2013). Figure 1 shows the approach to designing a low-carbon transport system.

Figure 1. Approach to designing a low-carbon transport system.

Source: Low Carbon Society Scenario Project (2011)

Creutzig et al. (2022) systematically assessed the mitigation potential of demand-side options categorised as Avoid, Shift, and Improve, and their link to human well-being. These options were shown to reduce sectoral emissions by 40-80% compared to the baseline in the end-use sectors, taking into account social behaviour, infrastructure and technology aspects.

Avoid, Shift, Improve (ASI) options can reduce many greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 2). Across all sectors, end-use strategies can help reduce the majority of emissions. These range from 41% (6.5 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e)) in the industry sector, to 41% (7.3 GtCO2e) in the food sector, 62% (5.8 GtCO2e) in the land transport sector, and 78% (6.8 GtCO2e) of the buildings sector.

Avoid options for buildings include reducing the size of houses, reducing the use of carbon-intensive building materials such as concrete and steel, using light sensors to reduce the need for artificial lighting, and reducing energy demand through passive housing. In transport, they include reducing travel distances through compact urban design, reducing traffic through telecommuting, and reducing car use by providing safe walking and cycling infrastructure. For food, it includes reducing food waste. In industry, it includes reducing the production of products by promoting a sharing economy.

Shift options include shifting to low-carbon fuels and renewable energy in buildings. In transport, they include a shift to walking, cycling and public transport. In food, they include a shift from meat to vegetarian diets. In industry, they include changing production processes, making long-lasting products and reusing old parts.

Improve options include better insulation and heating systems and more efficient appliances in buildings. In transport, they include improved vehicle efficiency and fleet improvements. In industry, they include the introduction of energy-efficient production.

When used together, these ASI options can further increase greenhouse gas reductions.

Figure 2. Mitigation potentials in end-use sector classified in ASI options.

Source: Figure 1: Mitigation potentials in end-use sector classified in ASI options in Creutzig, F., Niamir, L., Bai, X. et al. (2022) Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being. Nat. Clim. Change. 12, 36–46.

In an interview with Dr. Steve Pye of University College London (UCL), he said: “We have been developing models for a long time that have focused on the supply side of energy and have not adequately addressed the demand side issues. More recently, we have started to address the demand side issues by looking at the demand side in more detail, inspired by papers such as Grubler et al. (2018), which argue that it is possible to meet the 1.5°C climate target, as well as many sustainable development goals, without relying on negative emission technologies. The UK strategy, led by the UK Climate Change Committee, still has many carbon removal options, including CCS (Global CCS Institute 2019). However, this is becoming a bit of an issue in the UK. So we believe that if we look seriously at what we can do on the demand side, we can reduce our reliance on future CO2 removal technologies such as CCS”.

Dr. Pye, together with Dr. Barrett and colleagues, used the model to analyse the potential for reducing energy demand in the UK (Barrett et al. 2022). Importantly, such energy demand-side strategies do not compromise quality of life, but rather provide climate change co-benefits such as healthy active lifestyles, reduced urban air pollution and improved work/life balance.

Barret et al. (2022) discuss avoiding unnecessary energy services (e.g. reducing the need to travel), shifting to less intensive modes (e.g. modal shift from car to public transport or active transport) and improving energy efficiency, referring to Creutzig et al.’s (2022) ‘demand-side evaluation framework’. The scenarios considered are the Ignore Scenario (current policies only), the Steer Scenario (strengthening of policies to mitigate global warming but falling short of the 2050 net zero target), the Shift Scenario (strengthening of energy demand-side policies) and the Transform Scenario (focusing on changes in technology, society, infrastructure and systems). Figure 3 shows the results of comparing the shift and transform scenarios with the ignore scenario in terms of the impact of avoid/shift policies and energy efficiency improvements on the demand for energy services. In both cases, the impact of avoid/shift in the industrial sector is large. In the transform scenario, avoid/shift also accounts for a larger share of the reduction in demand for energy services in non-residential buildings.

Overall, Barret et al. (2022) show that it is possible to reduce energy demand by 52% by 2050 compared to 2020 levels without compromising the quality of life for people in the UK. The transform scenario suggests that the reduction in energy demand could reduce reliance on high-risk carbon removal technologies, which would require some investment and an increase in climate ambition. It concludes that national climate policies need to promote integrated energy supply and demand reduction policies.

Figure 3. Relative contribution of efficiency measures versus those that avoid or shift energy service demand. For each of the energy service sectors, this figure highlights the contribution of categories of interventions to reductions in energy demand in 2050, compared with the Ignore scenario. The categorization includes interventions that avoid or shift energy service demands compared with efficiency measures under Shift (a) and Transform (b), compared with Ignore. Credit: Centre for Research into Energy Demand Solutions (Barrett et al. 2022).

3. Decarbonization in the housing sector

Escribe et al. (2023) discuss that reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in residential buildings depends on three channels – home insulation, switching to low-carbon heating systems and decarbonisation of heating fuels – which are rarely assessed together. Their combination needs to be considered in interaction with top-down energy system planning and decentralised policies in the housing sector, in particular insulation subsidies. Their paper examines how the design of insulation subsidies affects the distribution of effort between these three channels for France. Assuming the best and most cost-effective scenario for achieving carbon neutrality, they found that home insulation could reduce emissions by 20%, fuel switching by 36% and fuel decarbonisation by 45%. However, this would require fully targeted subsidies.

The best case scenario for greenhouse gas reductions ignores barriers to energy efficiency in different households. For example, the best scenario optimally selects the most cost-effective insulation measures in housing, but if the occupants are from low-income groups, they cannot borrow money to invest in these measures. Based on recent reports of higher morbidity and mortality in low-income households living in the least energy-efficient housing, they have also included health care costs in their objective function. They consider three alternative scenarios as the next best option: a uniform subsidy scenario, a comprehensive study scenario and a subsidy based on energy reduction. The three more realistic alternative scenarios increased the total cost of the system by 11-16%. The paper highlights that subsidy specifications play an important role in determining the trade-offs between insulation and fuel switching. For example, when subsidies are provided for comprehensive measures, investment in insulation is twice as high and investment in heat pump installations is 19% lower compared to a uniformly subsidised scenario.

4. Examples of laws and regulations to reduce energy demand

The Climate and Resilience Act came into force in 2021, based on the recommendations of the Climate Citizens’ Assembly held in 2019-2020. The Climate and Resilience Act prohibits domestic flights within distances that can be travelled by rail within 2 hours and 30 minutes. A number of conditions were taken into account in the decision to lift the ban. For example, connecting flights and private jets were not included. The announcement of a carbon tax increase in 2018 triggered a nationwide yellow vest movement. At that time, there was a strong opposition movement in rural areas where the fuel price increase directly affected people’s lives. According to Dr. Briand, this time it may have been accepted because fewer people were directly affected.

The Climate and Resilience Act includes a number of provisions, proposals and policies to accelerate funding for cycling infrastructure. For example, it sets targets for bike sharing. It is expected to increase to 9% in 2024 and 12% in 2030. To promote cycling infrastructure, the state will co-finance part of the infrastructure in each city.

According to Dr. Briand, “France is trying to set up low emission zones in all conurbations with more than 150,000 inhabitants. They are trying to regulate vehicles entering the conurbations, regulate them according to their emission levels and phase them out. There are problems with that. Many of the people who drive older vehicles in France are poor. The question is how to accommodate them and transfer them to public transport. This is another problem related to modal shift. There is also the question of whether it is the responsibility of the state or the cities and regions to develop infrastructure. For example, who should be given the authority to implement appropriate mobility policies that integrate peri-urban and urban areas? We need to have a coherent view of demand-side behaviour, with a focus on infrastructure planning and land use planning”.

Dr. Briand also presented the ‘energy efficiency certificate’ (Ministère de la Transition Écologique et de la Cohésion des Territoires 2020), which is important for system change on the demand side. This system, introduced in France in 2005, obliges energy sellers (electricity, petrol, etc.) to reduce their energy consumption. Energy sellers are given energy consumption targets. In order to meet their own targets, energy sellers can buy certificates for the reduced energy consumption of those who are not obliged to do so and use them to meet their own targets. This is the case, for example, when citizens retrofit buildings to reduce their energy consumption. Interestingly, companies that sell energy offer money to promote energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption. In the transport sector, certificates are issued for switching to energy-efficient vehicles, training drivers to drive ecologically, running car-sharing services, etc. (Ministère de la Transition Écologique et de la Cohésion des Territoires n.d.).

According to Dr. Briand, “individual measures such as eco-driving are not enough. We need a major modal shift. The French government has introduced a policy that requires companies to report their transport emissions and an action plan to reduce them. The onus is not only on transport operators, but also on those who use the transport system. It is important to hold accountable not only those who transport, but also those who sell, such as industrial manufacturers. In the past, transport planning was only about building roads, but now we need to involve manufacturers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At the moment there are only action plans, and there are still issues such as how to hold shippers accountable. What we can do now is increase that transparency.”

Dr. Thomas le Gallic of CIRED presented the environmental plans currently being discussed by the government (especially “Mieux agir : planification écologique”). He said that many of the initiatives, such as those in the housing and services sectors, were carried over from previous plans, but there were also some new initiatives. For example, the training of building professionals to facilitate comprehensive renovation and the provision of assistance to reduce the complexity of the renovation process are being considered. However, it is difficult and time-consuming to change traditional construction methods. There is also little innovation in mobility. However, to give a few examples, some structural and operational measures are being considered for local express services in the metropolitan area. There is also investment in cycling infrastructure. And the promotion of teleworking is also being considered.

5. Systemic change

Dr. Briand sees infrastructure development as part of the systemic changes affecting energy demand. He points out that demand-side strategies are very complex, involving many different elements, but are often used in a narrow sense. For example, the strategy for international maritime transport published in 2023 considers only two pillars: improving energy efficiency and fuel switching (Nippon Kaiji Kyokai 2023). Maritime transport companies consider the use of lower carbon fuels – ammonia and hydrogen – as a demand-side strategy. However, as these do not affect structural changes in trade, Dr. Briand believes that energy efficiency improvements and fuel switching are not demand-side strategies. For Dr. Briand, demand-side behaviour includes changing the amount of goods transported and the GHG emissions generated in their production. The whole supply chain must be considered.

Systemic change is important in the transport sector to achieve net zero (Harry-Villain, Briand, Waisman et al. 2021). In this article, they highlight three business transformations. These are 1) re-examining existing industrial processes to reduce the number of freight movements; 2) revamping manufacturing facilities and suppliers to reduce the supply chain; and 3) changing logistics organisation and lowering transport service levels to support logistics consolidation and facilitate modal shift. These are described below.


1) Re-examination of existing industrial processes and business models

Many existing industrial processes and business models have been developed without considering their environmental and climate impacts. As a result, current business strategies aimed at selling more, such as developing product diversification and planning for obsolescence[1], end up over-consuming materials and creating unnecessary transport needs.

Achieving zero-emission freight transport and carbon neutrality by mid-century will require reducing unnecessary freight transport, while reducing material consumption and the environmental footprint of products (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2021). For businesses, this means a complete rethink of business models, product and service design, manufacturing processes and packaging, not only to make them smaller and lighter, but also to increase reusability, recyclability and repairability, and to replace the use of fossil-based materials with bio-based materials. It can also lead to the development of new services aimed at making products reusable, repairable and recyclable.

Some of these product changes and service innovations require strong innovative capabilities and significant investments in R&D and infrastructure adaptation, but they also provide a competitive advantage for new growth businesses. Potential long-term benefits in gaining an advantage and avoiding transition risks.

This business transformation could reduce the number of products and packaging produced by limiting the amount of energy and materials needed in the early stages of production and extending their life in the medium to long term. By reducing the amount of material used and saving space and weight in the vehicle, the need for deliveries and the associated energy consumption, emissions and costs can be reduced.

[1] Planned obsolescence is a marketing technique whereby old products are planned to become obsolete by incorporating mechanisms at the manufacturing stage to artificially shorten the life of the product or by introducing new products to the market in a short period of time, thereby increasing the willingness to buy new products. 1920s, Business model initiated by Alfred Sloan, who laid the foundations of General Motors (GM) in the 1920s. Named after Bernard London’s book “Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence” (1932).


2) Rethinking manufacturing facilities and suppliers

Over the past few decades, the location of both suppliers and manufacturing facilities has been the result of complex trade-offs between business parameters such as reducing costs and ensuring quality and availability in target markets. But climate change and emissions reduction have long been left out of the equation. Growing tensions with competitors benefiting from less stringent social and environmental standards and lower production costs have led many companies to increase their capacity to source raw materials and manufacture in semi-finished products. The company decided to distribute its products (both manufactured and finished) around the world if they were cheap. As a result, supply chains have become very long and dispersed. In the coming decades, promoting a carbon-neutral economy will mean shorter supply chains and greater social responsibility (Zhan et al. 2020). Companies need to rethink the location of industrial facilities and suppliers throughout the value chain of their products. For most products, production and consumption can be reorganised in regional hubs, raw materials and recycled materials can be sourced locally, and entire industrial processes can be located closer to the customer.

This major transformation will first require a review of all the different steps in the process and a rethink of the location of facilities and suppliers depending on the location of the market. While such changes may result in increased costs and the need to ensure appropriate social transition for factory workers, they will increase the resilience of supply chains and benefit local jobs and economies. It also has the potential to increase customer acceptance. For example, during the coronavirus crisis, the production of paracetamol in Europe was disrupted by the interruption of supplies of the active ingredient from outside Europe. In response, the company that produces the active ingredient for Europe’s major pharmaceutical groups plans to open a plant in the European Union in 2023.

In some cases, it may not be possible to migrate just one step in an industrial process and more fundamental changes to the industrial process or business model itself may be required. For example, in the agri-food industry, most food is sourced locally, but not necessarily the exact same product. Alternatives need to be found, such as offering products that are more seasonal or, in some cases, less diverse. In other industries, this may mean finding new bio-based, recyclable, local alternatives and intermediates, and changing entire production processes.

These business transformations require strong regional planning and incentives to shorten and reduce supply chain fragmentation, and to reduce the number of kilometres travelled for goods (both finished and semi-finished) and associated freight transport. This is possible. This directly avoids energy consumption and associated emissions, but also reduces dependence on shipping and aviation (where full decarbonisation is expensive and involves many technical uncertainties). It can also reduce emissions and encourage the use of land transport and its electrification.


3) Changes in logistics organisation and decline in transport service levels

Dr. Briand also discussed the need for changes in logistics. Most companies rely on just-in-time logistics organisations, which reduce inventory and internal logistics costs and improve service standards in terms of flexibility and speed of transport deliveries. In many industries, the average size of shipments is shrinking. However, their frequency has increased, the number of small deliveries has risen dramatically, load factors have fallen and vehicle miles travelled have risen. This is because transport prices are low relative to the quality of service provided, and because the social and environmental externalities associated with these smaller, faster and more flexible deliveries are not included in the cost. In a zero-emissions transport world, transport costs will include social and environmental impacts such as carbon emissions and congestion, and efficiency measures will be encouraged. Companies will therefore need to use more efficient alternatives to road freight and vehicles, which will require rethinking logistics organisations and changing transport and logistics service levels.

This transformation not only entails increasing inventories of both final products and intermediate goods in the production chain and losing some flexibility, but also changes the planning of industrial processes and increases the number of warehouses with which companies work, or at least the need to adjust the size and location of the warehouse. For example, if an important customer is thousands of miles from your factory and you need to ship by air every week, you may want to adjust your production schedule by using a different warehouse closer to the customer and shipping your products by rail rather than by air. Alternatively, you could use road transport. This solution is ultimately cheaper and less carbon intensive. In general, changes in total logistics costs depend on the different modes of transport, storage and capital asset costs.

In a similar situation, members of another community decided to slow down delivery speeds and reduce the number of deliveries in order to consolidate flows without changing industrial processes. This required changes in customer relationships, product availability, strategy, and inventory. In the business-to-business market, initial offers and contracts are beginning to explore these efficiency solutions.

These measures can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the freight transport sector. However, while companies are at the forefront of these structural changes, their decisions are embedded in local and global market rules and specific national economic, social, geographical and political circumstances. For example, it is possible to rethink industrial processes and business models towards a more circular economy, where products are reused, repaired, recycled and their lifespan extended, but these measures are difficult to implement when customers expect lower prices, customisation and product variety.

This will require changes in both customer preferences and industrial processes, but to accelerate this and implement it at scale, appropriate public policies will be needed to provide a suitable and fair business environment with constraints and incentives.

6. Reducing emissions from urban transpor

Dr. Vincent Viguié of CIRED is working on modelling how different policies can reduce emissions in cities. He and his colleagues have published a paper on this in Nature Sustainability (Liotta et al. 2023). He also gave an overview in the Carbon Brief (Viguié and Liotta 2023).

They conducted a comprehensive analysis of the transport policies of 120 cities across five continents and showed that cities can reduce carbon emissions by a total of 22% without compromising the quality of life of their residents. The study found that individual cities can reduce CO2 emissions from transport by more than 30% through a combination of policies such as fuel taxes, public transport improvements and urban planning.

The impact of a particular policy varies depending on the city in which it is implemented. They have analysed the different effects that the development of public transport will have on CO2 emissions 15 years from now..

Liotta et al. (2023) also looked at transport costs, average house prices, air quality, noise pollution, traffic accidents and health benefits associated with active travel (walking or cycling instead of driving). Depending on the city, these effects can be either positive or negative overall. Fuel taxes and the opening of new public transport systems are expected to improve air quality and reduce noise pollution and road accidents. On the other hand, urban planning to limit urban sprawl can contribute to rising house prices and public transport can be very expensive. Figure 4 estimates the health and economic impacts of bus rapid transit systems, fuel efficiency, fuel taxes and compact cities.

According to Dr. Viguié, in each of the 120 cities, at least one combination of policies that reduce transport related GHG emissions and do not reduce the monetised measure of welfare was found to exist. Together, they reduce greenhouse gas emissions from urban transport by a total of 22% over 15 years. This means that in every city considered, most of the simulated emissions reductions could be achieved without compromising the quality of life of citizens.

Figure 4. The impact of some climate policies on different elements of population welfare. Health impacts are shown in blue and economic impacts are shown in yellow. Each dot represents a city in the sample. The box represents the 25th to 75th percentile range, the horizontal line in the middle represents the most common (median) value across cities, and the whiskers correspond to 1.5 times the interquartile range.

Source: Viguié and Liotta (2023) Guest post: How 120 of the world’s major cities could cut transport CO2 by 22%. Carbon Brief.

7. Demand-side behaviour from a sustainable development perspective such as sufficiency

According to Dr. le Gallic, lifestyle changes could play a large role in reducing demand, but the impact of policy on lifestyle changes is currently uncertain, and would need more research. However, he said that Europe is increasingly recognising that lifestyle changes are key to achieving low-carbon targets. Costa et al (2021) estimated that behavioural changes could contribute more than 20% of the total greenhouse gas emission reductions needed to reach net zero by 2050.

Millward-Hoplins et al. (2020) and Vita et al. (2018) emphasise that beyond a certain level of demand, happiness and demand become decoupled. They seek innovative solutions to reduce activity levels without compromising well-being through the concepts of decent living (Millward-Hoplins et al. 2020) and sufficiency (Vita et al. 2018).

Figure 5 shows the research gaps in sufficiency assessment identified by Dr. Gallic during the interview.

Figure 5. An illustration of the research gaps for progress on sufficiency measures.

Source: Presentation by Thomas le Gallic at the time of the interview on 10 October 2023.

Dr. Pye is interested in the idea of sufficiency. Degrowth may not be accepted by some because it is very important for everyone to grow. The idea of sufficiency is potentially more acceptable to people. This is a very interesting area and one where a lot of research is now being done.

8. Conclusion

If greenhouse gas emissions continue at current rates, the global average temperature is likely to exceed 1.5°C in the near future. As temperatures rise, air conditioning use will increase, potentially accelerating the rise. In addition, power outages can cause serious damage. At the same time as adaptation, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by reducing demand for energy is becoming increasingly important. However, there are many issues that need to be addressed.

The spread of electric vehicles is an effective measure against global warming. However, if CO2-free electricity is not used, its effectiveness as a countermeasure against global warming will be limited, even if it is effective as a countermeasure against air pollution. Problems have also been raised regarding the need for rare metals and the disposal of electric vehicles. The issue of environmental impact has also been raised in relation to renewable energy.

What is needed in the future is a shift to lifestyles that reduce energy demand. Research on lifestyle change and sufficiency has recently attracted attention. However, evaluation of the impact of policies on lifestyles is at an early stage, and evaluation of the impact of lifestyle changes on happiness is currently very limited. Research and policy on energy sufficiency will become increasingly necessary.

Appropriate policies are important to reduce the demand for services. For example, the development of compact cities and the improvement of public transport comfort require policy support. On the other hand, there are many initiatives that can be taken by individuals and businesses. It will be necessary to further promote demand-side measures from various angles and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

List of experts interviewed
  1. Yann Briand: Institut du Développement Durable et des Relations Internationales (IDDRI), Paris, France. Expert in decarbonization measures in the transportation sector. Interview on 9 October 2023, 10:00-11:00.
  2. Vincent Viguié: Centre International de Recherche sur l’Environnement et le Développement (CIRED), Nogent-sur-Marne, France. Expert on decarbonization measures in the transportation sector and on the economic assessment of adaptation policies. 10 October 2023, 15:30-16:00.
  3. Thomas de Gallic: Centre International de Recherche sur l’Environnement et le Développement (CIRED), Nogent-sur-Marne, France. Expert on demand-side management against climate change. Interview 10 October 2023, 16:00-16:30。
  4. Steve Pye: University College London (UCL), London, the UK. Expert on an energy model from supply and demand sides. Interview 13 October 2023, 13:30-14:30.
View list