Are environmental fiscal incentives effective in inducing energy-saving renovations? An econometric evaluation of the French energy tax credit

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 104831
Author(s):  
Anna Risch
Energies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cesare Biserni ◽  
Paolo Valdiserri ◽  
Dario D’Orazio ◽  
Massimo Garai

Promotion of retrofit actions on existing buildings is a goal in Italy, since most of them were built before the 80′s when little attention was paid to energy saving. This paper presents an integrated passive design approach to reduce the heating demand and limit the costs of a representative existing residential complex located in Bologna, in the northern part of Italy. To this purpose, we explored different scenarios upon actions taken on the building structure: (1) High efficiency windows; (2) additional insulation on the external walls; or (3) the simultaneous application of high efficiency windows and improved thermal envelope, on both external walls and roofing. The numerical optimization has been performed dynamically using TRNSYS simulation tool, to evaluate energy consumptions in different structural conditions. Then, the developed model has been calibrated by the real consumption data deduced from energy bills (years 2009–2015). Finally, the energy results obtained in the above mentioned different scenarios have been evaluated under an economic assessment of cost investment: It has been highlighted that the payback time (PBT) results to be strongly influenced by the national policies of fiscal incentives. According to the present model, the most profitable condition is obtained when additional insulation on the external walls is applied: The total amount of energy saving resulted to be equal to 930.4 MWh, with an optimal PBT of roughly six years, when tax refund was contemplated.


2001 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerrit Antonides ◽  
Sophia R. Wunderink

Summary: Different shapes of individual subjective discount functions were compared using real measures of willingness to accept future monetary outcomes in an experiment. The two-parameter hyperbolic discount function described the data better than three alternative one-parameter discount functions. However, the hyperbolic discount functions did not explain the common difference effect better than the classical discount function. Discount functions were also estimated from survey data of Dutch households who reported their willingness to postpone positive and negative amounts. Future positive amounts were discounted more than future negative amounts and smaller amounts were discounted more than larger amounts. Furthermore, younger people discounted more than older people. Finally, discount functions were used in explaining consumers' willingness to pay for an energy-saving durable good. In this case, the two-parameter discount model could not be estimated and the one-parameter models did not differ significantly in explaining the data.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document