Search

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

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



Energy Savings from More Efficient Appliances: A Rejoinder

J. Daniel Khazzoom

Year: 1989
Volume: Volume 10
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol10-No1-14
View Abstract

Abstract:
In his article (Lovins, 1988) responding to my Note (Khazzoom, 1987), Amory Lovins makes a series of allegations. I find they contain precious little substance. Space limitations preclude a response to each one of Lovins' points, but I will address some of the specifics. The following overall observations convey perhaps in a nutshell some of the difficulties with the article that emerge from the discussion of the specifics below: (i) The article makes statements about facts, which are not supported by the evidence; (ii) The article holds contradictory positions and makes inconsistent statements, with little or no effort at probing into their implications; (iii) A depressing aspect of the article that the serious reader has to contend with is the lack of command of the basics of economics the article reveals. There is rattling with economic terminology and there are grand-sounding statements about economics, but it is not clear the author knows quite what they all mean. I turn to these below. But I would like to clarify the procedure 1 will be following. Lovins' article is substantially made up of quotes from the unpublished work by the National Resources Defense Council. In preparing the present rejoinder, I have made the assumption that since Lovins used the quotes to elaborate on points that he made (often in two lines or less), the statements he quoted say what he would have said, had he written the elaboration in his own words. I hope this clarification will spare any future counterarguments that Lovins did not make these statements, but only quoted them.



Energy Efficiency Investments in the Home: Swiss Homeowners and Expectations about Future Energy Prices

Anna Alberini, Silvia Banfi, and Celine Ramseier

Year: 2013
Volume: Volume 34
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/01956574.34.1.3
View Abstract

Abstract:
Using conjoint choice experiments, we surveyed 473 Swiss homeowners about their preferences for energy efficiency home renovations. We find that homeowners are responsive to the upfront costs of the renovation projects, government-offered rebates, savings in energy expenses, time horizon over which such savings would be realized, and thermal comfort improvement. The implicit discount rate is low, ranging from 1.5 to 3%, depending on model specification. This is consistent with Hassett and Metcalf (1993) and Metcalf and Rosenthal (1995), and with the fact that our scenarios contain no uncertainty. Respondents who feel completely uncertain about future energy prices are more likely to select the status quo (no renovations) in any given choice task and weight the costs of the investments more heavily than the financial gains (subsidies and savings on the energy bills). Renovations are more likely when respondents believe that climate change considerations are important determinants of home renovations.



Does Daylight Saving Save Electricity? A Meta-Analysis

Tomas Havranek, Dominik Herman, and Zuzana Irsova

Year: 2018
Volume: Volume 39
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/01956574.39.2.thav
View Abstract

Abstract:
The original rationale for adopting daylight saving time (DST) was energy savings. Modern research studies, however, question the magnitude and even direction of the effect of DST on electricity consumption. Representing the first meta-analysis in this literature, we collect 162 estimates from 44 studies and find that the mean reported estimate indicates slight electricity savings: 0.34% during the days when DST applies. The literature is not affected by publication bias, but the results vary systematically depending on the exact data and methodology applied. Using Bayesian model averaging we identify the most important factors driving the heterogeneity of the reported effects: data frequency, estimation technique (simulation vs. regression), and, importantly, the latitude of the country considered. Electricity savings are larger for countries farther away from the equator, while subtropical regions consume more electricity because of DST.



Evaluating the Energy-Saving Effects of a Utility Demand-Side Management Program: A Difference-in-Difference Coarsened Exact Matching Approach

Richard Boampong

Year: 2020
Volume: Volume 41
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/01956574.41.4.rboa
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper seeks to estimate the energy-saving effect of a Demand-Side Management program, specifically Gainesville Regional Utility's (GRU) high-efficiency central Air Conditioner (AC) rebate program in which GRU offers incentives to its customers to replace their old, low-efficiency AC unit with a high-efficiency model. We use a difference-in-difference coarsened exact matching approach to reduce the imbalance of pre-treatment characteristics between treated and control households. We find substantial annual energy savings of the high-efficiency AC program. We disaggregate the energy-saving effects into summer peak effects, winter peak effects, and non-peak effects. The results indicate that the summer peak effects are substantial and statistically significant while there are little or no statistically significant effects of the program on winter peak demand. Also, by following program participants over a three-year period, we find that there is no statistically significant rebound effect of the high-efficiency AC rebate program.





Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 

© 2020 International Association for Energy Economics | Privacy Policy | Return Policy