Energy-saving behavior and marginal abatement cost for household CO2 emissions

Avoided economic impacts of energy demand changes by 1.5 and 2 °C climate stabilization

“…The additional cost implies reduction of spending for non-energy purposes. To maximize overall utility, the consumer tends to reduce the part of utility associated with energy; thus, the consumer reduces lighting and other services (Hamamoto 2013), creating GDP losses in the region. In some regions, trade must keep overall demand change, and thus, GDP losses are larger than other regions, since the demand change does not generate industrial activities.…”

Household carbon emission research: an analytical review of measurement, influencing factors and mitigation prospects

“…Hamamoto (2013), for example, suggests that a high carbon price is needed in order to incentivize consumers to adopt energy-consuming durable products that can reduce CO 2 emissions in Japan. Liu et al (2011), on the other hand, believe the government should implement environmental policies involving the imposition of a HCE tax by which carbon-intensive commodities bear high levies.…”

“…The barriers to reducing HCEs are typically the investment (and sometimes maintenance and operation) costs involved and lack of interest or information (Hamamoto (2013). The main policies exercised by governments for environmental protection to overcome these barriers are interventions in the form of financial incentives and disincentives, mandatory standards and the provision of guidance information.…”

Investigating carbon tax pilot in YRD urban agglomerations—Analysis of a novel ESER system with carbon tax constraints and its application

“…All of the factors mentioned above are the key to promoting the development of ESER system. In addition, the design of ESER policy [8,9], the advocating energy conservation behavior [10], even the ESER of some concrete industries [11][12][13] or the progress of ESER technology [14,15] will affect the effectiveness of ESER.…”