Australia vs Latvia: Getting electricity: System average interruption duration index (SAIDI
Australia
1 DB16-20 methodology
in 2019
Latvia
0.99 DB16-20 methodology
in 2019
Australia rank
75th
Latvia rank
76th
Getting electricity: System average interruption duration index (SAIDI over time
- Australia
- Latvia
How they compare
Australia currently reports 1 DB16-20 methodology against 0.99 DB16-20 methodology in Latvia, a difference of 0.01 DB16-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Latvia ahead.
Australia ranks 75th and Latvia ranks 76th of 125 countries.
Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting electricity: system average interruption duration index (saidi, Australia or Latvia?
- Australia, at 1 DB16-20 methodology against 0.99 DB16-20 methodology in Latvia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting electricity: system average interruption duration index (saidi between Australia and Latvia?
- 0.01 DB16-20 methodology, with Australia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Latvia?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Australia and Latvia rank globally for getting electricity: system average interruption duration index (saidi?
- Australia ranks 75th and Latvia ranks 76th of 125 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting electricity: System average interruption duration index (SAIDI) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The system average interruption duration index is the average total duration of outages (in hours) experienced by a customer in a year. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.