Energy demand and population changes

Allen, E.L.; Edmonds, James A.

doi:10.1007/bf02300592

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many demographic factors determine personal travel patterns, including where people live, where they work and how they get there, the household units into which they are grouped, and a household's stage in the family life cycle (Abrahamse and Morrison, 1981;Allen and Edmonds, 1980;Fritzsche, 1981;Garkovich, 1982;Hanson and Hanson, 1981;Keyes, 1976Keyes, , 1980Keyes, , 1982Small, 1980;Sosslau, 1980;Spielberg and Andrle, 1982;Zelinsky and Sly, 1981;Zimmerman, 1980). However, the links between these demographic factors and personal travel patterns are poorly understood, and data for studying them are sparse (Hirst, 1980;Hoch, 1981;Saltzman and Newlin, 1981).…”

Section: Findings From Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is population decentralization lengthening commuting distances?

Morrison

Abrahamse

1983

Popul Res Policy Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study questions the conventional wisdom about how commuting distances change when workers migrate from metropolitan to nonmetropolitan areas. It does not appear that decentralization yields a more energy-intensive configuration of residences and job locations: we find no indication that this migration lengthens the aggregate distance that workers commute. Some migrants do commute long distances, but their numbers are offset by many more who end up closer to their jobs. Our findings relate to two contrasting views ("sprawl" and "nucleation") of how workers are becoming repositioned in relation to their jobs as settlement patterns change; the latter view appears more realistic. We briefly discuss policy implications pertaining to alternative transportation modes for commuting, setting priority travel needs in an energy emergency, and telecommunications as a substitute for commuting.

show abstract

Section: Findings From Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is population decentralization lengthening commuting distances?

Morrison

Abrahamse

1983

Popul Res Policy Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…25. More skewed income distribution Skewed All states transition to the current income distribution of the most inequal country in the world (South Africa) in 2100, with a Gini coefficient of 0.63.a The Gini coefficient is an index to measure income inequality of a determined population group (U.S. states in this study).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Implications of different income distributions for future residential energy demand in the U.S.

Sampedro

Msangi

Waldhoff

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Future income distribution will affect energy demand and its interactions with various societal priorities. Most future model simulations assume a single average consumer and thus miss this important demand determinant. We quantify long-term implications of alternative future income distributions for state-level residential energy demand, investment, greenhouse gas (GHG), and pollutant emission patterns in the United States (U.S.) by incorporating income quintiles into the residential energy sector of the Global Change Analysis Model with 50-state disaggregation (GCAM-USA). We find that if the income distribution within each U.S. state becomes more egalitarian than present, what means that the difference on income between the richest and poorest decreases over time, residential energy demand could be 10% (4-14% across states) higher in 2100. This increase of residential energy demand will directly reduce energy poverty, with a very modest increment on economywide CO2 emissions (1-2%). On the other hand, if U.S. states transition to a less equitable income distribution than present, with the difference between richest and poorest increasing over time, residential energy demand could be 19% (12-26% across states) lower. While this study focuses on a single sector, we conclude that to improve understanding of synergies and tradeoffs across multiple societal goals such as energy access, emissions, and investments, future model simulations should explicitly consider subregional income distribution impacts.

show abstract

Demography, Urbanisation and Energy Demand

Pachauri

2012

Environment &Amp; Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy demand and population changes

Cited by 5 publications

References 6 publications

Is population decentralization lengthening commuting distances?

Is population decentralization lengthening commuting distances?

Implications of different income distributions for future residential energy demand in the U.S.

Demography, Urbanisation and Energy Demand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About