• Energy Research
• 7. Clean energy close
• US close
• Energy Policy close

Abstract We demonstrate the importance of stock turnover on industrial energy efficiency through a literature review and a case study of energy-intensive equipment, i.e. the electric arc furnace in the US steel industry. We describe the common methods for assessing stock turnover. We have found that both stock turnover and retrofit are important elements to explain the energy efficiency improvement rates. We investigated the development of electricity use in electric arc furnaces in the United States by tracking the development of individual furnaces over the period 1990–2002. This provides a detailed picture of changes in the stock or fleet of furnaces through turnover and/or retrofit. Our results confirm the results of other empirical studies that there is no clear lifetime of equipment. However, retired furnaces are distinctly less efficient than furnaces remaining in the stock, while new furnaces are distinctly more efficient than the average stock. We found an annual average improvement in specific electricity consumption of 1.3%/year over the studied period, of which 0.7%/year was due to stock turnover and 0.5%/year due to retrofit of stock in service throughout the period.

Abstract Many energy-related investments are made without a clear financial understanding of their values, risks, and volatilities. In the face of this uncertainty, the investor—such as a building owner or an energy service company—will often choose to implement only the most certain and thus limited energy-efficiency measures. Conversely, commodities traders and other sophisticated investors accustomed to evaluating investments on a value, risk, and volatility basis often overlook energy-efficiency investments because risk and volatility information are not provided. Fortunately, energy-efficiency investments easily lend themselves to such analysis using tools similar to those applied to supply side risk management. Accurate and robust analysis demands a high level of understanding of the physical aspects of energy-efficiency, which enables the translation of physical performance data into the language of investment. With a risk management analysis framework in place, the two groups—energy-efficiency experts and investment decision-makers—can exchange the information they need to expand investment in demand-side energy projects. In this article, we first present the case for financial risk analysis in energy efficiency in the buildings sector. We then describe techniques and examples of how to identify, quantify, and manage risk. Finally, we describe emerging market-based opportunities in risk management for energy efficiency.

Abstract Like cities, many large national parks in the United States often include “urban” visitor and residential areas that mostly demand (rather than produce) energy and key urban materials. The U.S. National Park Service has committed to quantifying and reducing scopes 1 and 2 emissions by 35% and scope 3 emissions by 10% by 2020 for all parks. Current inventories however do not provide the specificity or granularity to evaluate solutions that address fundamental inefficiencies in these inventories. By quantifying and comparing the importance of different inventory sectors as well as upstream and downstream emissions in Yosemite National Park (YNP), this carbon footprint provides a case study and potential template for quantifying future emissions reductions, and for evaluating tradeoffs between them. Results indicate that visitor-related emissions comprise the largest fraction of the Yosemite carbon footprint, and that increases in annual visitation (3.43–3.90 million) coincide with and likely drive interannual increases in the magnitude of Yosemite′s extended inventory (126,000–130,000 t CO2e). Given this, it is recommended that “per visitor” efficiency be used as a metric to track progress. In this respect, YNP has annually decreased kilograms of GHG emissions per visitor from 36.58 (2008) to 32.90 (2011). We discuss opportunities for reducing this measure further.

Abstract The benefit-cost analysis of standards to reduce vehicle greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) displays large net benefits from fuel savings for new vehicle buyers. This finding points to an energy efficiency gap: the energy-saving technology provided in private markets appears not to include all the technologies that produce net private benefits. The gap exists if the costs of energy-saving technologies are lower than the present value of fuel reductions, and “hidden costs” – undesirable aspects of the new technologies – do not exceed the net financial benefits. This study examines the existence of hidden costs in energy-saving technologies through a content analysis of auto reviews of model-year 2014 vehicles. Results suggest that it is possible to use fuel-saving technologies on vehicles without imposing hidden costs. For each technology examined, reviews with positive evaluations outnumbered those with negative evaluations. Evidence is scant of a robust relationship between vehicles’ use of energy-saving technologies and negatively rated operational characteristics, such as handling or acceleration. Results do not provide evidence for hidden costs as the explanation of the efficiency gap for vehicle fuel-saving technologies.

This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood of meeting the 2 °C target: a least-cost pathway and a pathway that postpones ambitious mitigation action, starting from the Copenhagen Accord pledges. Both pathways have similar 2010–2050 cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis shows that postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs. The models agree that carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear energy are important mitigation technologies, while the shares of biofuels and other renewables vary largely over the models. Differences between India and China with respect to the timing of emission reductions and the choice of mitigation measures relate to differences in projections of rapid economic change, capital stock turnover and technological development. Furthermore, depending on the way it is implemented, climate policy could increase indoor air pollution, but it is likely to provide synergies for energy security. These relations should be taken into account when designing national climate policies.

This paper illustrates the main results of an expert elicitation survey on advanced (second and third generation) biofuel technologies. The survey focuses on eliciting probabilistic information on the future costs of advanced biofuels and on the potential role of Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) efforts in reducing these costs and in supporting the deployment of biofuels in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD countries. Fifteen leading experts from different EU member states provide insights on the future potential of advanced biofuel technologies both in terms of costs and diffusion. This information results in a number of policy recommendations with respect to public RD&D strategies and is an important contribution to the integrated assessment modelling community.

Using an experiment embedded within a representative survey, this study examined the interactive effect of party identification and risk/benefit perception on public opinion about biofuels. Democrats tended to be more supportive of biofuels than Republicans. However, the effect of party identification on opinion about biofuels varied when individuals considered the risk/benefit of biofuels in different domains. Individuals who reported greater affiliation with the Democratic Party were likely to support funding biofuels research when primed with the economic risks or the social/ethical benefits of biofuels. For those who considered the social/ethical benefits of biofuels, more self-identified Democrats were likely to support biofuels production and use. However, more self-identified Democrats were less supportive of biofuels production and use when they considered the political risks of biofuels. Implications are discussed.

Abstract In modern developed economies, one of the primary objectives is to manage the transition from polluting to cleaner technologies as efficiently as possible. By now, in the current empirical literature, one can identify technological spillovers from environmental innovations as a major driver of this process. Specific energy policy aspects connected with industry behaviour have yet to be explored. The aim of this paper is to investigate energy efficiency via environmental innovation and the resulting degree of resilience and adaptation of both developed and developing countries. The work applies the non-parametric DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) framework and Tobit analysis. For this scope, it is built a panel dataset made of some 5000 observations based on energy policy and sustainable development variables for 136 OECD and non-OECD countries. The results show that knowledge spillovers from environmental innovations reduce inefficiency and therefore strengthen the resilience of economies that decide and manage to invest adequately in the transition to more sustainable technologies. Besides, OECD countries improve their energy efficiency scores over time, whilst non-OECD countries do not. This implies that sustainable technologies transition is made more efficient by environmental innovation but the process is fostered by disposing of a resilient economic system – hence, vulnerability can affect the transition. These hypotheses lead to important economic, social and environmental implications for energy policy modelling.