Market Barriers, Market Failures, and the Energy Efficiency Gap PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Market Barriers, Market Failures, and the Energy Efficiency Gap PDF full book. Access full book title Market Barriers, Market Failures, and the Energy Efficiency Gap by Adam B. Jaffe. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Adam B. Jaffe
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Energy conservation
Languages : en
Pages : 19
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Adam B. Jaffe
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Energy conservation
Languages : en
Pages : 19
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Ivan Petrov
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Automobiles
Languages : en
Pages : 27
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Energy conservation
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
"The United States has made much progress in energy efficiency in recent decades. U.S. energy use is approximately half of what it would have been if we had not improved our efficiency over the past 40 years. Still, there are large, cost-effective opportunities to increase energy efficiency much further, thereby helping us to cut energy bills, reduce pollution, and encourage economic growth. However, a variety of market failures and market barriers contribute to keeping us from fully realizing our energy efficiency potential. This report analyzes several targeted policies that leverage market forces and address specific market failures and barriers to energy efficiency without requiring substantial spending or government mandates."--Publisher's description (viewed Apr. 1, 2013).
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 23
Get Book Here
Book Description
In his recent paper in The Energy Journal, Ronald Sutherland argues that several so-called market barriers'' to energy efficiency frequently cited in the literature are not market failures in the conventional sense and are thus irrelevant for energy policy. We argue that Sutherland has inadequately analyzed the idea of market barrier and misrepresented the policy implications of microeconomics. We find that economic theory, correctly interpreted, does not provide for the categorical dismissal of market barriers. We explore important methodological issues underlying the debate over market barriers, and discuss the importance of reconciling the findings of non-economic social sciences with the economic analysis of energy demand and consumer decision-making. We also scrutinize Sutherland's attempt to apply finance theory to rationalize high implicit discount rates observed in energy-related choices, and find this use of finance theory to be inappropriate.
Author: Todd D. Gerarden
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
Energy-efficient technologies offer considerable promise for reducing the financial costs and environmental damages associated with energy use, but these technologies appear not to be adopted by consumers and businesses to the degree that would apparently be justified, even on a purely financial basis. We present two complementary frameworks for understanding this so-called "energy paradox" or "energy-efficiency gap." First, we build on the previous literature by dividing potential explanations for the energy-efficiency gap into three categories: market failures, behavioral anomalies, and model and measurement errors. Second, we posit that it is useful to think in terms of the fundamental elements of cost-minimizing energy-efficiency decisions. This provides a decomposition that organizes thinking around four questions. First, are product offerings and pricing economically efficient? Second, are energy operating costs inefficiently priced and/or understood? Third, are product choices cost-minimizing in present value terms? Fourth, do other costs inhibit more energy-efficient decisions? We review empirical evidence on these questions, with an emphasis on recent advances, and offer suggestions for future research.
Author: Brandon Hofmeister
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
For decades, economists and energy policy analysts have noticed the existence of an "energy efficiency gap" - a significant underinvestment in energy efficiency measures whose benefits outweigh their costs - among residential consumers. Promoting energy efficiency is generally the most cost-effective manner to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to meet future energy demand, while simultaneously promoting economic growth and reducing poverty. Economists have attempted to explain the energy efficiency gap by applying theories of market failures that retain the underlying assumption that consumers generally act as economically rational actors. These theories partly explain the energy efficiency gap, but because they fundamentally misconstrue the reality of human behavior, traditional economic theories alone fail to adequately account for the energy efficiency gap. Social psychologists have discovered a number of predictable behavioral tendencies that contradict the rational actor assumption of economists. Many of these behavioral tendencies serve as significant cognitive barriers to investments in energy efficiency. Because traditional economists' explanations for the energy efficiency gap are incomplete, their public policy solutions to close the gap are likewise insufficient. Specifically, most traditional economists reject forms of public policy they deem paternalistic. The article describes a number of general factors that should be considered when determining whether a market intervention is justified and applies these factors to some specific policies designed to promote residential energy efficiency. The article finds that a suite of market interventions - such as financial subsidies and mandatory minimum energy efficiency standards for buildings, appliances, and electronic devices - is justified to address the energy efficiency gap.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Consumers regularly forgo purchases of high efficiency appliances that appear to be cost effective at a reasonable rate of return. While some argue that this is a true revelation of preferences for appliance features, this 'efficiency gap' can be largely explained by a combination of market and behavioral failures that reduce consumers ability to evaluate the relative value of appliances and skew preferences toward initial cost savings, undervaluing future reductions in operating costs. These failures and barriers include externalities of energy use, imperfect competition between manufacturers, asymmetric information, bounded rationality, split incentives, and transaction costs (Golove 1996). Recognizing the social benefit of energy conservation, several major methods are used by policymakers to ensure that efficient appliances are purchased: minimum efficiency standards, Energy Star labeling, and rebates and tax credits. There is no single market for energy services; there are hundreds of uses, thousands of intermediaries, and millions of users, and likewise, no single appropriate government intervention (Golove 1996). Complementary approaches must be implemented, considering policy and institutional limitations. In this paper, I first lay out the rationale for government intervention by addressing the market and behavioral failures and barriers that arise in the context of residential energy efficiency. I then consider the ways in which some of these failures and barriers are addressed through major federal programs and state and utility level programs that leverage them, as well as identifying barriers that are not addressed by currently implemented programs. Heterogeneity of consumers, lack of financing options, and split incentives of landlords and tenants contribute significantly to the under-adoption of efficient appliances. To quantify the size of the market most affected by these barriers, I estimate the number of appliances, and in particular the number of outdated appliances, in California rental housing. Appliances in rental housing are on average older than those in owner occupied housing. More importantly, a substantial proportion of very old appliances are in rental housing. Having established that a very old stock of appliances exists in California rental housing, I discuss tariff financing as a policy option to reduce the impact of the remaining market and behavioral barriers. In a tariff financing program, the utility pays the initial cost of an appliance, and is repaid through subsequent utility bills. By eliminating upfront costs, tying repayment to the gas or electric meter, requiring a detailed energy audit, and relying upon utility bill payment history rather than credit score in determining participant eligibility, tariff financing largely overcomes many barriers to energy efficiency. Using California as a case study, I evaluate the feasibility of implementing tariff financing. For water heaters in particular, this appears to be a cost-effective strategy. Tariff financing from utilities is particularly valuable because it improves the ability of low-income renters to lower their utility bills, without burdening landlords with unrecoverable capital costs. To implement tariff financing country-wide, regulations in many states defining private loan-making institutions or the allowable use of public benefit funds may need to be modified. Tariff financing is relatively new and in most locations is only available as a pilot program or has only recently exited pilot phase. This preliminary evaluation suggests that tariff financing is a valuable future addition to the toolkit of policymakers who aim to increase the diffusion of efficient appliances. While regulatory approval is necessary in states that wish to pursue tariff financing, at this point, the major barrier to further implementation appears to be the newness of the financing mechanism.
Author: Todd D. Gerarden
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Energy consumption
Languages : en
Pages : 62
Get Book Here
Book Description
Energy-efficient technologies offer considerable promise for reducing the financial costs and environmental damages associated with energy use, but these technologies appear not to be adopted by consumers and businesses to the degree that would apparently be justified, even on a purely financial basis. We present two complementary frameworks for understanding this so-called "energy paradox" or "energy-efficiency gap." First, we build on the previous literature by dividing potential explanations for the energy-efficiency gap into three categories: market failures, behavioral anomalies, and model and measurement errors. Second, we posit that it is useful to think in terms of the fundamental elements of cost-minimizing energy-efficiency decisions. This provides a decomposition that organizes thinking around four questions. First, are product offerings and pricing economically efficient? Second, are energy operating costs inefficiently priced and/or understood? Third, are product choices cost-minimizing in present value terms? Fourth, do other costs inhibit more energy-efficient decisions? We review empirical evidence on these questions, with an emphasis on recent advances, and offer suggestions for future research.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 67
Get Book Here
Book Description
This report reviews current perspectives on market barriers to energy efficiency. Ratepayer-funded utility energy-efficiency programs are likely to change in scope, size, and nature as the deregulation process proceeds; the authors research focuses on understanding to what extent some form of future intervention may be warranted and how they might judge the success of particular interventions, especially those funded by ratepayers. They find that challenges to the existence of market barriers have, for the most part, failed to provide a testable alternative explanation for evidence suggesting that there is a substantial ''efficiency gap'' between a consumer's actual investments in energy efficiency and those that appear to be in the consumer's own interest. They then suggest that differences of opinion about the appropriateness of public policies stem not from disputes about whether market barriers exist, but from different perceptions of the magnitude of the barriers, and the efficacy and (possibly unintended) consequences of policies designed to overcome them. They conclude that there are compelling justifications for future energy-efficiency policies. Nevertheless, in order to succeed, they must be based on a sound understanding of the market problems they seek to correct and a realistic assessment of their likely efficacy. This understanding can only emerge from detailed investigations of the current operation of individual markets.
