Search

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

Search Results for All:
(Showing results 1 to 10 of 21)

Next 10 >>


Sources of Deep Coal Mine Productivity Change, 1962-1975

Joe G. Baker

Year: 1981
Volume: Volume 2
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No2-5
View Abstract

Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to investigate the causes of labor productivity decline in bituminous deep mines during the 1970s. Prior to 1970, coal mining was a leading industry in productivity growth: average deep mine labor productivity increased from 5.8 tons per miner per shift in 1950 to 15.6 tons per miner per shift in 1969. Since 1969, average labor productivity has fallen every year to a 1977 level of 8.7 tons per miner per shift.



Energy Efficiency and Productive Efficiency: Some Thoughts Based on American Experience

Sam H. Schurr

Year: 1982
Volume: Volume 3
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol3-No3-1
View Abstract

Abstract:
I am greatly honored to be the first recipient of the IAEE awards for contributions to the literature of energy economics and for service to the profession, and I want to express my deep apprecia-tion to the membership of the Association. The awards citation was very generous. Its reference to my early work in energy economics as having made fundamental contributions to the literature makes me less apologetic than might otherwise be the case for using this occasion to revisit (and partially update) some research that was first written up in a book published more than 20 years ago. Those findings, it seems to me, carry lessons for understanding problems that confrontus today, perhaps even more so now than in the comparatively tran-quil U.S, energy setting of the mid-1950s, when my colleagues and I were originally doing the research.



Sources of Productivity Decline in U.S. Coal Mining, 1972-1977

William J. Kruvant, Carlisle E. Moody, Jr., and Patrick L. Valentine

Year: 1982
Volume: Volume 3
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol3-No3-4
View Abstract

Abstract:
In this paper we estimate production functions for surface and underground coal mines. These production functions are then used to estimate individual mine productivity, to explain productivity differentials across mines, and to assess the importance of several assumed sources of productivity decline in this industry. For readers not familiar with coal-mining operations, we first present a summary discussion of coal-mining technology.



The Role of Energy in Productivity Growth

Dale W. Jorgenson

Year: 1984
Volume: Volume 5
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol5-No3-2
View Abstract

Abstract:
The objective of this paper is to analyze the role of energy in the growth of productivity. The special significance of energy in economic growth was first established in the classic study Energy and the American Economy 1850-1975, by Schurr and his associates (1960) at Resources for the Future. From 1920 to 1955, Schurr noted, energy intensity of production had fallen while both labor and total factor productivity were rising.' The simultaneous decline of energy intensity and labor intensity of production could not be explained solely on the basis of substitution of less expensive energy for more expensive labor. Since the quantity of both energy and labor inputs required for a given level of output had been reduced, technical change would also be a critical explanatory factor.From 1920 to 1955 the utilization of electricity had expanded by a factor of more than ten, while consumption of all other forms of energy only doubled. The two key features of technical change during this period were that (1) the thermal efficiency of conversion of fuels into electricity increased by a factor of three, and (2) "the unusual characteristics of electricity had made it possible to perform tasks in altogether different ways than if the fuels had to be used directly."2 For example, as Schurr noted, the electrification of industrial processes had led to much greater flexibility in the application of energy to industrial production.



Productivity Growth and Technical Change in the Generation of Electricity

Paul L. Joskow

Year: 1987
Volume: Volume 8
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol8-No1-2
View Abstract

Abstract:
No student of the electric power industry and its regulation can help but be troubled by the industry's recent historical record on productivity and technical change. For many years the electric power industry was one of the leading sectors of the economy in terms of productivity growth and technological innovation. This is no longer true. By almost every measure, productivity growth and technical change have virtually ceased in the past decade (or even decreased, by some estimates).



Sources of Labor Productivity Variation in the U.S. Surface Coal Mining Industry, 1960-1976

Libby Rittenberg and Ernest H. Manuel, Jr.

Year: 1987
Volume: Volume 8
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol8-No1-6
View Abstract

Abstract:
Our paper analyzes the sources of labor productivity variation in U.S. bituminous coal surface mining from 1960 to 1976. The coal mining industry was among the first to experience a prolonged decline in labor productivity in the post-World War II period. In surface mining nationally, labor productivity in 1977 was 26.6 tons per worker-day, or 28 percent less than the peak of 36.7 tons per worker-day achieved in 1973. Moreover, in several major coal-producing states, the decline began much earlier and was more dramatic. For example, in West Virginia (the first state to experience declining productivity) the loss in productivity between 1965, the year in which productivity in the state peaked, and 1976 was nearly 52 percent. Eastern Kentucky experienced an even larger drop of 56 percent between 1967 and 1976. It was only the expansion of surface mining to western states in the 1970s that delayed the appearance of a national decline in productivity until the early 1970s. The industry has thus foreshadowed the labor productivity declines that subsequently occurred in other industries.



Declining Energy Intensity in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector

Claire P. Doblin

Year: 1988
Volume: Volume 9
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol9-No2-8
View Abstract

Abstract:
Since the first oil price shock of 1973 -74, there has been considerable reduction in total energy use per unit of total output. This development has many names: increasing energy conservation, demand elasticity, increasing energy productivity, or, conversely, decreasing energy intensity.



Choice of Technology and Long-Run Technical Change in Energy-Intensive Industries

Finn R. Forsund and Lennart Hjalmarsson

Year: 1988
Volume: Volume 9
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol9-No3-3
View Abstract

Abstract:
The difference between short-run and long-run flexibility in energy use is an important topic in energy demand modeling. Dynamic formulations are required to reveal this difference. The microeconomic foundation for the distinction between short- and long-run energy substitution possibilities is the embodiment of production techniques.



Measuring the Energy Efficiency and Productivity Impacts of Embodied Technical Change

Ernst Berndt, Charles Kolstad and Jong-Kun Lee

Year: 1993
Volume: Volume 14
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol14-No1-2
View Abstract

Abstract:
Using data from the manufacturing sectors in the United States, Canada and France, we distinguish the energy efficiency and productivity impacts of embodied and unembodied technological progress. We find that technological progress embodied in new equipment is responsible for a surprisingly small proportion of productivity growth. We conclude the paper by interpreting this finding.



Energy and Capital: Further Exploration of E-K Interactions and Economic Performance

Catherine Morrison

Year: 1993
Volume: Volume 14
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol14-No1-9
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper explores some interactions between energy and capital that affect firms' productive performance through indirect effects of energy price changes. Different capital stocks (including high-tech capital) and different U.S. manufacturing industries (including high and low energy- and capital-intensive industries) are examined. This allows evaluation of cross-effects, expressed as the impact of changing capital composition on energy conservation (computer induced energy conservation) and energy price effects on capital returns (including composition, utilization and scale). The resulting effects on productivity growth are then considered, through the impact of energy price changes both on the demand and cost share of energy, and on the measured returns to different types of capital.




Next 10 >>

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 

© 2021 International Association for Energy Economics | Privacy Policy | Return Policy