Energy consumption in the US reconsidered. Evidence across sources and economic sectors

Abstract

This study analyzes the impact of GDP shocks in USA on primary energy consumption and the reverse impact in a comprehensive and novel framework, distinguishing by economic sectors (commercial, industrial, residential and transportation) and energy source, i.e., total fossil (coal, natural gas and petroleum), nuclear, and renewable (hydroelectric, geothermal and biomass) for the period 1973:1 to 2015:2. To this end, we apply Granger causality analysis through the Hatemi-J [1] and Toda and Yamamoto [2] approaches from a time series perspective to evaluate the existence of asymmetries on this bidirectional relationship. The empirical results suggest that the impact of GDP on primary energy consumption is heterogeneous and energy source-specific, and an asymmetric behavior appears among cycles. Moreover, it seems clear that the US economy is highly dependent on petroleum energy consumption. The renewable energy sources do not seem to show any relationshipsources seem to show no relationship with economic growth, and finally, our results suggest that energy consumption in the industrial sector is key to economic growth and is also very sensitive to negative economic shocks.

Modeling the effect of non‐linear process parameters on the prediction of hydrogen production by steam reforming of bio‐oil and glycerol using artificial neural network

“…The adverse effect of utilizing energy derived from fossil sources like coal and crude oil on the environment has propelled the quest for a more sustainable, renewable, and cleaner form of energy. 1,2 Based on the latest emission gap report of the United Nations Committee on climate change, greenhouse gas emissions need to be cut globally by 7.6% every year for the next decade to comply with the Paris target. 3 However, it is worrisome to know that the global greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are on the increase.…”

Projections and Recommendations for Energy Structure and Industrial Structure Development in China through 2030: A System Dynamics Model

“…Many researchers analyzed the impact of energy structure, technological progress, and industrial structure on energy intensity with the logarithmic mean Divisia index technique, the results show that energy structure and industrial structure have different effects on energy intensity [15][16][17]. Cross-correlations between energy structure and industrial structure based on the well-known detrended cross-correlation analysis are shown to be significant and strong [18,19]. Some authors described the historical evolution of various end uses in the different energy sectors through mapping Sankey diagrams.…”

Testing Alternative Models in Sustainability Economics: Baumol versus Georgescu-Roegen

“…Baumol's (1986) view is particularly useful as it explores in a simple and straightforward manner assumptions tacitly embraced not only by neoclassical economists, but also by the economic order triggered by the Industrial Revolution. Although Baumol's model (1986) was published more than 30 years ago, it remains an important reference to address neoclassical thinking about the relation between natural resources, economic growth and technological innovation (Earp & Romeiro, 2015;Kalimeris et al, 2014;Chen et al, 2017;Carmona et al, 2017;Bithas & Kalimeris, 2016). Moreover, the premise that there are almost no limits for scientific/technological progress to increase efficiency in the use of natural resources has been endorsed in the core of the neoclassical mainstream of environmental economics (Romeiro, 2012, p. 73).…”