Direct and Indirect Rebound Effects for U.S. Households With Input-Output Analysis Brinda A. Thomas Ph.D. Candidate, Engineering & Public Policy Dept. Carnegie Mellon University [email protected]Climate and Energy Decision-Making Center Annual Meeting 21 May 2012
9
Embed
Direct and Indirect Rebound Effects for U.S. Households With Input-Output Analysis
Direct and Indirect Rebound Effects for U.S. Households With Input-Output Analysis. Brinda A. Thomas Ph.D. Candidate, Engineering & Public Policy Dept. Carnegie Mellon University [email protected] Climate and Energy Decision-Making Center Annual Meeting 21 May 2012. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Direct and Indirect Rebound Effects for U.S. Households With Input-Output Analysis
Brinda A. ThomasPh.D. Candidate, Engineering & Public Policy Dept.
Climate and Energy Decision-Making CenterAnnual Meeting
21 May 2012
Energy Efficiency Opportunities for Carbon Mitigation are Substantial & Cheap
Efficiency contributes 66% of CO2 abatement in 2020 and 52% of CO2 abatement in 2030
IEA 20092
Economic, Technical & Behavioral Limits to Energy Efficiency
3
• Energy Efficiency “gap” (Jaffe and Stavins, 1994, Howarth and Sanstad, 1995, Sorrell et al., 2004)
• Engineering vs. Actual Conditions for Efficiency (Vine et al., 1994)
• Rebound Effects– Households or firms may increase energy service demand due to
• Direct Rebound: the lower price of energy services with efficiency• Indirect Rebound: re-spending energy cost savings and embodied energy• Macroeconomic Effects
– Basic definition: 1 – (Actual Savings/Potential Savings)– Measured by various elasticities (% in demand wrt % in price)
• Stakeholders include policymakers, utilities, program evaluators, and analysts involved with– State and federal energy efficiency policies, utility demand-side management
programs, and dynamic/forecasting models of energy demand
Rebound = Direct (Own-Price Elasticity) + Indirect (Cross-Price Elasticity )
4
Direct + Indirect Rebound Effect Model
Assumptions1.Each fuel provides a single energy service2.Basic elasticity properties hold (Engel Agg., Cournot Agg. & Slutsky Decomp.)3.Compensated (constant-utility) cross-price elasticities for all goods are constant4.Ignoring capital costs of efficiency (overestimate: Henly et al., 1987)
Expected Efficiency Savings = % reduction in household energy expenditures = EsssI
4
Dubin et al. (1983)Greening et al. (2000)Greene (2011)
Dubin et al. (1983)Greening et al. (2000)Greene (2011)
2004 U.S. Consumer Exp. Survey2004 U.S. Consumer Exp. Survey EIO-LCA 2002 model
www.eiolca.netEIO-LCA 2002 modelwww.eiolca.netHouthakker and
Taylor (1966, 2010)Houthakker and Taylor (1966, 2010)
Rebound Effects Vary by Unit of Analysis
5
Rebound in Primary Energy & CO2e varies by fuel
6
Error bars from uncertainty in direct rebound (± 3 - 11%) & in indirect rebound due to income elasticity functional form (± 1 - 2%)
Summary of Findings• 71-82% of expected efficiency savings can be achieved after
accounting for direct and indirect rebound effects– 10-20% direct and 5-11% indirect rebound effects, depending on fuel– Electricity and gasoline efficiency have lower rebound effects than natural
gas, depending on prices and budget shares
• Indirect rebound does not appear to be bounded by the energy share of GDP (Schipper and Grubb, 2000)
– We overestimate the rebound effect by ignoring effects possible higher capital costs of efficient appliances and vehicles
• Rebound highly sensitive to energy prices and electricity grid mix• States with high energy prices and cleaner electricity have higher
% rebound effects
7
• Policies explicitly designed to counter rebound effects may not be needed– Difficult to target higher energy prices only to those households
making efficiency investments – this might impose even more barriers to efficiency investments
– A carbon price at the social cost of carbon ensures that rebound effects – and energy consumption in general – yield net social benefits
• Study of rebound effects allows for:– improved targeting of efficiency policies (by fuel and end-use)– better assessments of the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency
investments– Improved forecasts of energy demand in scenarios with large
investments in energy efficiency
8
Policy Implications
Thanks to Ines Azevedo, M. Granger Morgan, Scott Matthews, Karen Turner, Zeke Hausfather, and Chris Weber for useful discussions.