Useful models for simulating policies to induce technological change

Abstract Conventional top-down and bottom-up energy–economy models have limitations that affect their usefulness to policy-makers. Efforts to develop hybrid models, that incorporate valuable aspects of these two frameworks, may be more useful by representing technologies in the energy–economy explicitly while also representing more realistically the way in which businesses and consumers choose between those technologies. This representation allows for the realistic simulation of a wide range of technology-specific regulations and fiscal incentives alongside economy-wide fiscal incentives and disincentives. These policies can be assessed based on the costs required to reach a goal in the medium term, as well as on the degree to which they induce technological change that affects costs over long time periods.

[1]  Mark Jaccard,et al.  Combining Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches To Energy-Economy Modeling Using Discrete Choice Methods , 2005 .

[2]  Nikolaus Hautsch,et al.  Estimating the Neighborhood Influence on Decision Makers: Theory and an Application on the Analysis of Innovation Decisions , 2003 .

[3]  Carl Koopmans,et al.  Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy demand model , 2001 .

[4]  H. Jacobsen.  Integrating the bottom-up and top-down approach to energy–economy modelling: the case of Denmark , 1998 .

[5]  Pierre-André Haldi,et al.  Dynamic formulation of a top-down and bottom-up merging energy policy model , 2003 .

[6]  Jane Harris,et al.  Investment in energy efficiency: a survey of Australian firms , 2000 .

[7]  Eduardo S. Schwartz,et al.  Investment Under Uncertainty. , 1994 .

[8]  P. Nijkamp,et al.  Energy Saving by Firms, Decision-Making, Barriers and Policies , 2001 .

[9]  Dennis Anderson,et al.  Induced Technical Change in Energy and Environmental Modeling: Analytic Approaches and Policy Implications , 2002 .

[10]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down in energy policy modeling , 1998 .

[11]  K. Train.  Discount rates in consumers' energy-related decisions: A review of the literature , 1985 .

[12]  Leo Schrattenholzer,et al.  Learning rates for energy technologies , 2001 .

[13]  J. Koomey,et al.  Estimating bounds on the economy-wide effects of the CEF policy scenarios , 2001 .

[14]  Peter G. Sassone,et al.  Industrial energy conservation: The reasons behind the decisions , 1984 .

[15]  Estimating the Neighborhood Influence on Decision Makers: Theory and an Application on the Analysis of Innovation Decisions , 2003 .

[16]  Vasilis Fthenakis,et al.  NEMS and MARKAL-MACRO Models for Energy-Environmental-Economic Analysis: A Comparison of the Electricity and Carbon Reduction Projections , 2002 .

[17]  Mark Jaccard,et al.  CO2, Emission Reduction Costs in the Residential Sector: Behavioral Parameters in a Bottom-Up Simulation Model , 1996 .

[18]  Gilbert E. Metcalf,et al.  Energy conservation investment: Do consumers discount the future correctly? , 1993 .

[19]  Clean-Energy Technologies,et al.  Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future: Interlaboratory Working Group on Energy-Efficient and Clean-Energy Technologies , 2000 .

[20]  M. Blatt,et al.  Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future , 2001 .

[21]  Mark Jaccard,et al.  Modeling the cost of climate policy: Distinguishing between alternative cost definitions and long-run cost dynamics , 2003 .

[22]  Arthur H. Rosenfeld,et al.  ENGINEERING-ECONOMIC STUDIES OF ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Opportunities and Challenges , 1998 .

[23]  R. Costanza,et al.  The evolution of preferences Why 'sovereign' preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it , 1998 .