TY - JOUR
T1 - Autonomous efficiency improvement or income elasticity of energy demand
T2 - Does it matter?
AU - Webster, Mort
AU - Paltsev, Sergey
AU - Reilly, John
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2008 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2008/11
Y1 - 2008/11
N2 - Observations of historical energy consumption, energy prices, and income growth in industrial economies exhibit a trend in improving energy efficiency even when prices are constant or falling. Two alternative explanations of this phenomenon are: a productivity change that uses less energy and a structural change in the economy in response to rising income. It is not possible to distinguish among these from aggregate data, and economic energy models for forecasting emissions simulate one, as an exogenous time trend, or the other, as energy demand elasticity with respect to income, or both processes for projecting energy demand into the future. In this paper, we ask whether and how it matters which process one uses for projecting energy demand and carbon emissions. We compare two versions of the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, one using a conventional efficiency time trend approach and the other using an income elasticity approach. We demonstrate that while these two versions yield equivalent projections in the near-term, that they diverge in two important ways: long-run projections and under uncertainty in future productivity growth. We suggest that an income dependent approach may be preferable to the exogenous approach.
AB - Observations of historical energy consumption, energy prices, and income growth in industrial economies exhibit a trend in improving energy efficiency even when prices are constant or falling. Two alternative explanations of this phenomenon are: a productivity change that uses less energy and a structural change in the economy in response to rising income. It is not possible to distinguish among these from aggregate data, and economic energy models for forecasting emissions simulate one, as an exogenous time trend, or the other, as energy demand elasticity with respect to income, or both processes for projecting energy demand into the future. In this paper, we ask whether and how it matters which process one uses for projecting energy demand and carbon emissions. We compare two versions of the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, one using a conventional efficiency time trend approach and the other using an income elasticity approach. We demonstrate that while these two versions yield equivalent projections in the near-term, that they diverge in two important ways: long-run projections and under uncertainty in future productivity growth. We suggest that an income dependent approach may be preferable to the exogenous approach.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=52049105880&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=52049105880&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.04.004
DO - 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.04.004
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:52049105880
SN - 0140-9883
VL - 30
SP - 2785
EP - 2798
JO - Energy Economics
JF - Energy Economics
IS - 6
ER -