Question
Global resource consumption and security
Refer to the map on pages 2–3 of the accompanying resource booklet.
The map shows oil production and consumption for selected countries in 2016. Only the names of the 10 countries with the highest consumption are shown.
(a) (i) Estimate the oil consumption of Japan, in million oil-equivalent tonnes, in 2016. [1]
(ii) Identify one country that consumes more oil than it produces. [1]
(b) Explain one reason why oil consumption per person over the last 20 years has:
(i) decreased in some high-income countries; [2]
(ii) increased in some middle-income countries. [2]
(c) Explain one environmental impact and one economic impact of international flows of waste on receiving countries. [2 + 2]
Environmental impact: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Economic impact: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
▶️Answer/Explanation
Ans:
(i) Allow 150 to 200
(ii) United States / India / China / Australia / Malaysia / UK
(i) decreased in some high-income countries
Award [1] for a valid reason and [1] for further development/exemplification to explain
decrease.
For example: Germany has adopted renewable sources of energy such as large scale
solar/wind/biomass power [1] due to a desire to cut carbon emissions [1].
Other possibilities include:
• awareness of environmental impact/people reduce use of transport by cars or use bikes
• relative economic cost/means that people cannot afford to use oil
• depletion of local reserves/access to oil is reduced
• advancement of technology/efficiency of machinery has increased
• global shift of industry/manufacturing has reduced in HICs
• changes in transport e.g. electric vehicles/require less fossil fuel
(ii) increased in some middle-income countries. [2]
Award [1] for a valid reason and [1] for further development/exemplification to explain increase.
For example: Growth of wealth of the middle class [1] leads to increased use of/demand for cars [1].
Other possibilities include:
• industrialization of economy/increased use of machinery which requires power/fuel.
• increased living standards/people use more devices that require electricity or fossil fuels.
• urbanization/people in urban areas have greater access to transport
(c) Award [1] for the impact and [1] for development/exemplification that explains impact on receiving countries.
Candidates may discuss a variety of types of waste including e-waste, and other types of consumer waste such as plastics and paper. Environmental impact
For example: Water may become polluted [1] by heavy metals from dump sites [1]
Other possibilities environmental impacts include:
• Air pollution from gases escaping from waste tips/methane from decomposition or toxic gases from burning.
• Soil pollution by leachates from waste/changing pH and heavy metal contamination.
• Ocean pollution from plastics and other elements of waste/waste dumps eroded by rivers or wind.
• Loss of biodiversity/dump sites destroy local ecosystems or water pollution kills wildlife in streams. Economic impact
For example: Jobs are created [1] extracting precious metals from electronic components [1] Other possible economic impacts include:
• Market for reused goods/e.g. clothes recovered from waste.
• Source of raw materials/new goods can be made from recovered material.
• Fuel for electricity generation/provides power for people and industry.
• Foreign exchange/countries are paid to import waste.
• Costs of cleaning up/removal of wastes or medical costs of treatment.
Question
Identify three fossil fuels.[2]
Suggest two reasons for the changing importance of nuclear energy.[2×2]
Explain the relationship between energy usage and ecological footprint for one or more countries.[5]
▶️Answer/Explanation
Markscheme
Fossil fuels include: oil, natural gas, coal, and oil shale. Peat and tar sands are also acceptable. Award 2 marks if three are correctly identified, or 1 mark if two are correct. No credit may be given if only one of the three is correct.
Award up to 2 marks for two distinct valid reasons, provided that they are developed by means of examples, explanation or detail.
Possible reasons include: issues associated with the disposal of nuclear waste; issues associated with safety/radiation leaks; relative cost of constructing nuclear power stations compared with other sources of power; increased need to generate electricity without relying on fossil fuels; acceptance that nuclear power is less polluting; anti-nuclear protests; decline in availability of non-renewables; costs of fossil fuels – peak oil scenario; meeting international targets for CO2.
Note that answers may explain either an increase or a decrease in the importance of nuclear power, and do not need to consider both for the award of full marks.
Countries with a higher energy usage generally have a higher ecological footprint [1 mark]. This stated relationship must be relevant to the named country or countries chosen.
Explanations for the relationship must explicitly link the country’s energy usage to its ecological footprint: a possible explanation for the usual relationship could be the fact that most energy is derived from fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas, the use of which inevitably raises a country’s ecological footprint since an ecological footprint includes the area (land) required for absorbing waste – in this case carbon dioxide emissions. Answers could also look at how increased use of renewable energy decreases the footprint.
Four basic statements of explanation [4×1 marks].
Two developed statements of explanation [2×2 marks].
One explanation with very good detail [4 marks].
If no country/countries are utilized in the response a maximum 3 marks may be awarded.
Examiners report
This was a straightforward question, which was remarked upon in a number of the G2 comments. Interestingly enough a large number of candidates did not score both marks here. Some interesting incorrect answers such as wood, carbon, diamonds.
Generally answered very well. Developed, and with examples, especially when discussing the hazardous nature of nuclear energy. Candidates perhaps do need to explain what they mean when referring to nuclear energy as “renewable” as technically this is not correct. Many responses used recent events in Japan to highlight contemporary changes taking place in some countries’ nuclear programmes. Perfect.
Most candidates attempted to describe the ecological footprint calculation and then stated that there is a positive relationship between energy use and ecological footprint. It was best explained when two countries with differing footprint sizes and energy usage were given as examples. Few candidates mentioned the waste aspect of the footprint, that is, dealing with carbon dioxide emissions, which is very much linked to the type of energy used and hence relevant to the question.
Question
Examine the changing importance of energy sources other than oil.
▶️Answer/Explanation
Markscheme
Answers should focus on the changing importance (production/consumption) of other major energy sources. Responses could look at other non-renewable fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, bio-fuel, geothermal, tidal, hydroelectric power and of course nuclear power – although it is not essential to cover all.
Answers should recognize that the global demand for energy is increasing as populations grow and countries develop economically. Most, if not all, of the energy sources above are becoming increasingly important in terms of production and consumption. Some quantitative or qualitative detail would be expected in terms of explaining and comparing the changed importance.
Stronger responses may consider at least one fossil fuel, renewables and nuclear energy. Answers may also refer to any scale (local, national, regional, global), but this is not a requirement for the award of full marks. A discussion of national energy sources might link with the concept of energy security – this approach should be highly credited if done well.
Answers that do not describe a range of energy sources and do not examine their changing importance should not progress beyond band D.
Responses based on appropriate, well-supported ideas and examples and which arrive at some conclusion about the changing importance of these sources of energy are likely to be credited at bands E/F.
Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.
Examiners report
There were some very good answers that gave comment on the reasons why oil was an issue looking at reserves, prices and geopolitical considerations. These used this as a springboard to look at the alternatives to oil and usually focusing on renewables. There was some good discussion of the importance of these energy sources and their relative merits. Candidates were usually well versed in exemplar materials. These stronger answers were well developed and covered most aspects of the question allowing the candidates to demonstrate and to discuss the shifting significance (production/consumption) of other important energy sources. These answers also made successful attempts to evaluate the different fuel options. Poor answers were characterized by weak knowledge and understanding and often with far too much emphasis on oil with hardly anything on the changing importance of other major energy sources. The weakest candidates failed to offer objective, detailed and specific examples/case studies with little attempt at any application.
Question
The table ranks the ten countries which had the largest oil consumption in 2010.
| Rank | Country | Oil consumption (thousands of barrels/day) |
| 1 | USA | 19 148 |
| 2 | Country A | 9057 |
| 3 | Japan | 4451 |
| 4 | India | 3319 |
| 5 | Russia | 3199 |
| 6 | Saudi Arabia | 2812 |
| 7 | Brazil | 2604 |
| 8 | Germany | 2441 |
| 9 | South Korea | 2384 |
| 10 | Canada | 2276 |
[Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2011]
Identify Country A.[1]
Briefly describe what is meant by the OPEC cartel.[2]
Explain two geopolitical impacts of the rise in global oil consumption since 1990.[4]
Suggest two reasons why sources of renewable energy have become more important in many countries in recent years.[4]
▶️Answer/Explanation
Markscheme
China [1 mark].
Award [1 mark] for a comment that recognizes what OPEC is – eg the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries or names of the members (Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela). Award [1 mark] for the operation as a cartel – formed to fix prices and/or production quotas.
There are many possibilities.
Award [1 mark] for each basic explanation of a valid impact and a further [1 mark] for its development.
The increase in global consumption has led to geopolitical pressures in some parts of the world as oil-hungry countries seek additional supplies of oil to meet their anticipated future demand. It has increased tensions in parts of the Middle East since that area has the world’s largest oil reserves to which oil-importing countries such as the US want to preserve their access. Equally, it has led to growing international tension over likely sources of oil, such as those in the Arctic, Sudan and South China Sea, that are currently not exploited. On the other hand, the rise in consumption has led to higher prices for oil, leading to more investment in non-oil sources of energy. Reference may be made to conflicts that have their origin in the securing of access to oil supplies. Comments may refer to variations in the rate of increase with NICs having a faster increase in demand which causes tensions. Some impacts may arise through the transport of oil and pollution incidents that are a consequence – be careful to credit only where they lead to geopolitical impacts.
Award [1 mark] for each valid reason, and an additional [1 mark] for its development, exemplification or further explanation.
Possible reasons could include:
- adoption of a green agenda
- energy security
- the desire to increase sustainability
- the declining availability and/or rising costs of fossil fuels
- the need to avoid global warming
- meeting pledges, for example, Kyoto-Copenhagen
- an increased investment in renewable energy technologies
- technological breakthroughs that have reduced the costs of renewable energy infrastructure
- alternative to nuclear since Fukushima.
Question
“The ecological footprint is the best measure of the relationship between population and resources for different countries.” Discuss this statement.
▶️Answer/Explanation
Markscheme
Refer to Paper 1 Section B markbands (available under the “Resources” tab) when marking this question.
Responses should show an understanding of the ecological footprint and how it is calculated and its utility value in measuring the relationship between population and resource use in different national contexts.
Ecological footprint (EF) – The theoretical measurement of the amount of land and water a population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb its waste under prevailing technology. It is usually measured in global hectares per capita – allow other valid ways in which “measurement” can be shown.
The focus of the essay should be on assessing the reliability of the EF as a measure of per capita resource use for different countries. Candidates can agree or disagree with the statement but need to be able to support their position. It is also possible that responses may take a balanced view and look at the strengths and the weaknesses of this as a measure. Responses may give some up-to-date examples/data. They may equally suggest alternative methods more suited to measuring the relationship between populations and resource consumption. It is also equally acceptable that responses refer to the Neo- and anti-Malthusian debate as it is relevant in this context.
Some possible strengths of the EF as a measure of population–resource relationships include:
- easy comparison with other countries
- temporal comparison possible
- as per capita takes into account an individual’s average consumption level
- biocapacity (global hectares)
- feel-good factor/national pride
- helps achieve targets (eg, Paris 2015)
- perceived to be easy to calculate
- increases awareness.
Some possible weaknesses of the EF as a measure include:
- is only an average per person / extremely wealthy have much larger footprints
- only informative and not a solution
- assumes all of Earth’s biocapacity is for human needs only
- data can be unreliable.
For band D expect some description of how the EF can help/not help measure a country’s population/resource relationship. This need not be balanced.
For band E expect either some explanation of how the EF can help/not help measure a country’s population/resource relationship or some discussion of its effectiveness using examples.
For band F expect both.