Turning lights into flights: Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for UK households

Abstract

Energy efficiency improvements by households lead to rebound effects that offset the potential energy and emissions savings. Direct rebound effects result from increased demand for cheaper energy services, while indirect rebound effects result from increased demand for other goods and services that also require energy to provide. Research to date has focused upon the former, but both are important for climate change. This study estimates the combined direct and indirect rebound effects from seven measures that improve the energy efficiency of UK dwellings. The methodology is based upon estimates of the income elasticity and greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity of 16 categories of household goods and services, and allows for the embodied emissions of the energy efficiency measures themselves. Rebound effects are measured in GHG terms and relate to the adoption of these measures by an average UK household. The study finds that the rebound effects from these measures are typically in the range 5-15% and arise mostly from indirect effects. This is largely because expenditure on gas and electricity is more GHG-intensive than expenditure on other goods and services. However, the anticipated shift towards a low carbon electricity system in the UK may lead to much larger rebound effects.

Economic structure and energy savings from energy efficiency in households

“…With regards to this issue, a number of studies have estimated the energy content of the measures that lead to improved energy efficiency, mainly for domestic uses (Kaufmann and Azary-Lee, 1990;Feist, 1996;Winther and Hestnes, 1999;Casals, 2006;Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 2007;Sartori and Hestnes, 2007;Chitnis et al, 2013;Cellura et al, 2013). This approach to the indirect rebound effect is thus specific for each energy service.…”

“…The linearity in the results is due to the implicit fixed proportion inputs of the production functions behind the input-output modelling methodology, so the substitution effects are not taken into account (Chitnis et al, 2013). The convergence towards the same direct plus indirect rebound effect of all scenarios, as the price elasticity for the demand of electricity in households increases (the direct rebound effect), is due to the fact that smaller monetary savings are left to be spent in other economic sectors, limiting the re-spending effect.…”

“…They found an indirect rebound effect of between 12% and 512%, with a most likely estimation of 34%, depending on the re-spending sectors. Another study for the UK (Chitnis et al, 2013), using a similar methodology, estimates the combined direct and indirect rebound effects from seven measures that improve the energy efficiency of UK dwellings in terms of greenhouse gases (GHG). Moreover, Thomas andAzevedo (2013a, 2013b) analyse the direct and indirect rebound effects for US households, also using an EEIOA approach.…”

“…cost per cloth load of a washing machine). Along these lines, some authors have considered the effects from the respending of the additional disposable income within the so-called rebound effect framework (Jalas, 2002;Carlsson-Kanyama et al, 2005;Cohen et al, 2005;Takase et al, 2005;Mizobuchi, K., 2008, Nässén andHolmberg, 2009;Druckman et al, 2010;Thomas, 2011;Saunders and Tsao, 2012; Thomas and Azevedo, 2013a;Thomas and Azevedo, 2013b;Chitnis et al, 2013;Yu et al, 2013;.…”

A brighter future? Quantifying the rebound effect in energy efficient lighting

“…According to de Almeida (2008) 15% of the German households surveyed stated that they let energy-efficient bulbs burn longer than ILs they had replaced. Chitnis et al (2013) rely on a building stock model and estimate the rebound effect (in terms of CO 2 emissions) at 10%. While they also recognize possible effects on illumination levels, Chitnis et al (2013) do not include luminosity change in their quantitative estimate.…”