Facebook LinkedIn Youtube Twitter
Shop
Search
Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

Search Results for All:
(Showing results 1 to 4 of 4)



Natural Gas from Seaweed: Is Near-Term R&D Funding by the U.S. Gas Industry Warranted?

Chennat Gopalakrishnan

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-10
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Energy, Economics, and Foregin Policy in the Soviet Union

Arthur W. Wright

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-11
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Modeling and Measuring Natural Resource Substitution

William A. Donnelly

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-12
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Energy, Foresight, and Strategy

Mark Newton Lowry

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-13
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Fuelwood in Urban Markets: A Case Study of Hyderabad

Ruthann C. Moomy

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-14
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Bioenergy and Economic Development

Ruthann C. Moomy

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-15
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).



Acknowledgments

n/a

Year: 1985
Volume: Volume 6
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol6-No4-16
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper is the result of a study of critical factors the Gas Research Institute (GRI) needed to consider in deciding whether to continue R&D funding of a Marine Biomass Project (M BP). The mission of this project is to determine the commercial feasibility of large marine biomass farms for methane conversion and to develop such farms if they prove viable (Aquaculture Associates, 1982).







Book Review - Electric Power: Deregulation and the Public Interest

William F. Thompson

Year: 1987
Volume: Volume 8
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol8-No3-12
No Abstract





Book Review - The Transportation of Soviet Energy Resources

Rod B. McNaughton

Year: 1987
Volume: Volume 8
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol8-No3-14
No Abstract





Competitive Speculative Storage and the Cost of Refinery Product Supply

Mark Newton Lowry

Year: 1989
Volume: Volume 10
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol10-No2-13
View Abstract

Abstract:
In a recent article in thisjournal, Charles Tiplitz (1986) presented estimates of the cost-minimizing level of seasonal distillate fuel oil inventories in the US primary sector. The costs he considered are for storage and the extra cost of operating refineries at extreme distillate yield. The "effect of price expectations" on seasonal inventories is deliberately excluded from the analysis.The Tiplitz study has interesting and useful results. However, it raises (without answering) the question of how cost-minimizing stocks differ from stocks held for price reasons. Some readers may conclude that price-responsive stocks are somehow different from or additional to cost-minimizing stocks.This interpretation runs counter to economic intuition. n the classic theory of the firm, the profit-maximizing plan for variable inputs also minimizes the variable cost of the most profitable output level. When there is an opportunity to store, supply can be accomplished through storage as well as input processing. Stocks are a variable input in the supply process. If producers are expected-profit maximizers, they should therefore manage stocks like other inputs to minimize the expected variable cost of supply.



Econometric Benchmarking of Cost Performance: The Case of U.S. Power Distributors

Mark Newton Lowry, Lullit Getachew, and David Hovde

Year: 2005
Volume: Volume 26
Number: Number 3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol26-No3-4
View Abstract

Abstract:
Benchmarking of cost efficiency has growing use in energy utility regulation. The state of the art has been limited in many countries by the small size of available national data sets and poor data on capital cost. Data available in the United States place fewer constraints on benchmarking methods. This paper develops an econometric cost benchmarking model for power distribution that is based on U.S. data. The model can address total cost and its major components. Numerous cost drivers are identified. Statistical tests of efficiency hypotheses are performed. The cost performances of utilities are compared to the industry norm. The suitability of the alternative frontier standard in regulatory applications is discussed.





Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 





function toggleAbstract(id) { alert(id); }