Conserved Energy Supply Curves for U.S. Buildings

Abstract

Comparison of nine conservation supply curves for electricity shows that fully implementing a series of energy efficiency measures will result in annual saving of 734 billion kWh (BkWh). This is 45 percent of 1989 U.S. building sector electricity use of 1627 BkWh and represents a $29 billion saving. When translated to units of conserved carbon dioxide (CC CO 2), this annual saving is 514 megatonnes, which is 10 percent of the total 1989 U.S. carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions from all sources. Implementing additional fuel efficiency measures would result in further potential saving of 5�2 quads of fuel (natural gas and oil) per year, or another 300 megatonnes of CO 2, at a net savings of $20 billion. Fuel switching (replacing electric resistance heat with on-site natural gas combustion) would produce annual saving of another 74 megatonnes of CO 2 at a net saving of $6�8 billion. Thus, total CO 2 saving from these combined efficiency measures are 890 megatonnes at a net saving of $56 billion per year. Copyright 1993 Western Economic Association International.

Is There an Energy Efficiency Gap?

“…Krupnick, Parry, Walls, Knowles, and Hayes (2010) come to amount of abatement. Krupnick, Parry, Walls, Knowles, and Hayes (2010) come to a similar qualitative conclusion. They compare the cap-and-trade provisions of the a similar qualitative conclusion.…”

“…Jacobsen (2010), for example, energy effi ciency policies relative to Pigouvian taxes. Jacobsen (2010), for example, simulates automobile supply and demand and shows that Corporate Average Fuel simulates automobile supply and demand and shows that Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards have a welfare cost of $222 per metric ton of carbon Economy (CAFE) standards have a welfare cost of $222 per metric ton of carbon dioxide abated, compared to $92 per ton for a gas tax that generates the same dioxide abated, compared to $92 per ton for a gas tax that generates the same amount of abatement. Krupnick, Parry, Walls, Knowles, and Hayes (2010) come to amount of abatement.…”

Defining a Standard Metric for Electricity Savings

“…This simple calculation adds real physical meaning to the electricity savings (but it's no substitute for more sophisticated approaches). Other important studies that would have benefitted from using this approximation include Brown et al (2008), EPRI (2009), Koomey et al (1991), Meier et al (1983) Rosenfeld andHafemeister (1988), Rosenfeld et al (1993), and any other efficiency potentials studies that don't include a full integrated analysis of supply and demand-side options.…”

Electricity Conservation: Consumer Rationality Versus Prospect Theory

“…Based on engineering data, the annualized cost of investments in energy efficiency starts as low as 0.5 cents per kilowatt hour while the 1989 average price of electricity in the United States was 6.4 cents per kilowatt hour. Although the average price was 6.4 cents, the price varied by region and type of consumer (Rosenfeld et al, 1993).…”