Meeting Summary

The Fifth Workshop on Energy Statistics in the APEC Region was held on October 23-25, 2006 at Keio Plaza Hotel in Tokyo. The workshop was organized by the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ) and sponsored by The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). Mr. Kenichi Matsui, Councillor of the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan and Chair of the APEC Expert Group on Energy Data and Analysis (EGEDA) presided over the meeting. Mr. Masaki Nakatsuka, Director of International Affairs Division of the Agency for Natural Resources and energy of METI welcomed the participants to the workshop. Representatives from Australia; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; New Zealand; Peru; Philippines; Russia; Chinese Taipei; Thailand; United States of America and Viet Nam attended the workshop. Representatives from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the International Energy Forum Secretariat (IEFS) attended the workshop as resource persons. A list of participants at the Workshop is provided in Annex 1.

Three major issues were discussed in the workshop such as:
* Review of 2004 annual data collection using the new format
* Review of CO2 emission and 2005 quarterly data collection and
* Improving JODI data quality

In addition, proposed minor changes to the new format and definitions, monthly gas data initiative and questionnaire survey on bio-fuels were also discussed:

For the overall review, Mr. Shigeru Kimura of the CA pointed out that timeliness was a big problem during the past year as only 3 economies submitted the questionnaires before the deadline on December 2005. It was noted that there was one economy who even submitted the data in July 2006, 7 months after the deadline. Mr. Kimura also stressed on some energy flows that were misunderstood in several member economies. In conclusion, Mr. Kimura encouraged the EGEDA workshop participants to: submit data by the deadline, improve completeness and report good quality data.

For the review of the individual questionnaires, Mr. Edito Barcelona, Mr. Takuya Miyagawa and Ms. Momoko Aoshima of the CA pointed out the problems/issues and errors observed for each of the submitted questionnaires by the member economies. They asked the participants to clarify the issues and correct the errors. They also proposed some measures to prevent the common errors in future data submissions to CA.

During the discussions, concerned member economies clarified their respective data while some brought al ong new data. Some definitions were also clarified like International Civil Aviation which is included in the final energy consumption. The CA agreed with the IEA's practice of re-classifying the data from this flow in the primary energy supply sector in the generation of the energy balance tables. The CA will also look into the Iron and Steel industry in the APEC region to be able to prepare a model that would distinguish the amount of coal products used in the transformation sector from the final energy consumption.

The CA also mentioned that in the absence of some data, the CA estimates these data and informs the concerned member economy for their concurrence. On this issue, some economies agreed with the CA estimating some data in the absence of estimation methodologies in their respective economies. The economies of Australia, Korea, Malaysia, and New Zealand, however do not wish the CA to independently estimate missing data, but rather coordinate closely with member economies to fill in gaps. Where necessary, estimates will be provided for the CA for publication. The CA would therefore exert more efforts to closely coordinate with member economies when it sees a need to estimate and when making such estimates.

Another issue raised about the annual data was the possibility of the changing calorific values for petroleum products in Korea as the existing calorific values being used are 20 years old. On this issue, IEA mentioned that they are also considering this for all IEA members but needs further study as they may need to change historical series as a result. For Japan, when the calorific values were changed, these values were also applied to historical data in order to prevent data gaps brought about by these changes.

Mr. Jean-Yves Garnier, Head of the IEA Statistics Division, shared during the workshop a report card system in the IEA that rates the performance of IEA members in submitting annual data. The report card rates nine points: two each for timeliness and completeness and five for data quality. The IEA mentioned that it was very effective in improving IEA annual energy database and suggested that a similar mechanism be applied in APEC. The CA promised to study a similar report card system and to present a tentative card for APEC economies at the next EGEDA meeting.

Review of CO2 Emission and 2005 Quarterly Data Submission
The CA reported on the status of collection of CO2 emission and 2005 quarterly energy data submission. For CO2, only 7 of the 11 economies that submit CO2 emission data have submitted the data for 2004. Of the four of these eleven economies, Peru promised to send the data. Malaysia stated that they have no official data so they agree that the CA make the estimate for their economy.

The other 10 economies without official data agreed that CA make the estimates but the CA should use the CO2 emission submitted by these economies to UNFCC for reference. Russia asked the CA to use the CO2 emission data generated by the IEA.

With regards quarterly data, the CA reported on the status of submission and identified economies that have failed or are late to submit the data. The concerned economies replied as follows: Indonesia could submit the data but the Indonesian representative mentioned that they need to compile the data from different units and under the new structure of the agency handling energy data, functions of different units are not yet defined.

Malaysia mentioned that the economy could only submit annual data as the Malaysian government and its stockholders has not yet approved the release of quarterly data. The Philippines on the other hand mentioned that it will start to create the database structure to enable quarterly submission of energy data while Russia promised to continue supplying data. Peru mentioned of the absence of quarterly data on coal. The CA would send reminders to member economies so that focal points will not forget to submit the data.

Other Issues
Other issues raised by the CA for discussion were: minor revision to the new format, monthly natural gas data collection and questionnaire survey on bio-fuels. For the minor revisions, the CA identified which parts of the questionnaire need to be revised in order to avoid common reporting errors and including missing flows. The participants advised the CA and the CA agreed to strictly adhere to harmonized definitions with IEA when making revisions to the new reporting format.

The CA's proposal for monthly gas data collection was approved in the workshop. The CA however should ensure that definitions that are used in the format are the same as the harmonized definitions with the IEA. A test run would be carried out from November 2006 to January 2007 for monthly data from September to November 2006. The results of the test run will presented at the next EGEDA meeting in February 2007.

As regards the questionnaire survey on bio-fuels, the participants agree to respond to the bio-fuels questionnaire prepared by the APEC EWG Bio-fuels Task Force. The CA informed the participants that it would expect the accomplished questionnaires by the end of November 2005.

Improving JODI Data Quality
The third day of the workshop was devoted to JODI as scheduled. Mr. Bruno Castellano of the IEFS made a presentation providing an explanation of JODI, the activities of the IEFS and the status of the JODI World Database.

The CA's presentation covered, assessment of APEC JODI data quality, JODI definitions of products and flows, verification of data accuracy as well as estimation and revisions. The CA also made a presentation on an appropriate JODI format that would be proposed jointly by the organization cooperating in JODI during the 6th JODI Conference.

The presentation on assessment of JODI data quality reported on the submission, timeliness, completeness, quality of the JODI data of the non-OECD APEC economies. (The data of APEC OECD economies are assessed by the IEA.) The timeliness could be rated as good as there were only a few months where the data are submitted late for all reporting economies. For submission, 3 of the 21 APEC economies do not submit data although one economy submits the data to another organization. As regards completeness, there were no improvements with reference to the previous year, 2005.

Quality is rated based on comparability and accuracy. For comparability, data are compared with data from other sources. There comments from the participants that the annual data should be the most reliable data hence there is no need to check for comparability. The CA and IEA however responded that the data is compared to a number of other sources data and not to only one source. As regards accuracy, the CA noted several inaccuracies in terms of internal balance. It was noted during the discussions that the reason for the imbalance are unreliable flows like the late data on imports in Hong Kong as well as difficulty in collecting reliable stocks data in Peru and the Philippines. The CA mentioned that if there are flows that are unreliable, like in Hong Kong, Peru and the Philippines, the CA will not use the internal balance check when assessing the quality of the JODI data from these economies.

To enable the member economies to report more accurate data to JODI, the CA made a presentation on JODI definitions of products and flows as well as verification of data accuracy. These two presentations were taken from the JODI Manual. The CA encouraged the member economies to consult the JODI Manual, which was distributed to the participants in CD-ROM when preparing the JODI report.

The CA made a presentation on an appropriate JODI questionnaire that would be proposed during the 6th JODI Conference in Riyadh for comments of the workshop participants. The new format would add five more products to the 7 products that are currently collected and 2 additional rows from 6 currently. The participants did not have strong opposition to the proposed changes in the format. It would be sent for comments to other organizations cooperating in JODI to get the support of these organizations for the eventual joint proposal to the Conference.

Conclusion
The APEC Energy Statistics workshop has proven to be very effective in clarifying issues and getting consensus among member economies. The CA greatly benefit not just in having face-to-face communications with focal points but also in knowing the reasons behind the difficulty in collecting data from member economies. Likewise, the CA is also able to clarify definitions and learned not only from resource persons but from the workshop participants as well. It therefore highly recommended that this workshop is held every year.