scholarly journals Limited Attention and the Residential Energy Efficiency Gap

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 192-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Palmer ◽  
Margaret Walls
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Residential Buildings ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Residential Energy ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Energy Efficiency Gap ◽  
Residential Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Audits ◽  
Efficiency Gap

Inattention may be an important contributor to the energy efficiency gap and may be particularly acute in residential buildings where many different features will determine a home's energy use. Energy audits can provide information on how to reduce energy loss in a home, but the use of audits is rare. We use data from a national survey of 1700 homeowners to study the factors affecting a home owner's choice to have an audit. We create an index of energy inattention for our survey respondents. This index and two additional behavioral factors prove to be important determinants of the audit choice.

Sustainable Schools: Making Energy Efficiency a Lifestyle Priority

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Purnell ◽  
Mark Sinclair ◽  
Anna Gralton
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Efficient ◽  
Alternative Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Positive Energy ◽  
School Students ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Residential Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Audits

AbstractPromoting efficient energy use in schools that consequently reduces greenhouse gas emissions is the purpose of a residential Energy Efficiency in Schools (EEIS) program reported on in this paper. Research on this program aligns with one of the “key overarching sustainability issues”, set out in the Learning for Sustainability: NSW Environmental Education Plan 2002-2005: “Sustaining energy use, cutting greenhouse gases”. The EEIS program was sponsored by Queensland EPA, Ergon Energy and Education Queensland. Participants learnt about innovation, leadership, coal mining, greenhouse issues, the “greenhouse challenge”, conducting energy audits, alternative energy and promoting energy efficient practices in school and the community.Three EEIS models in Queensland that supported change in energy usage behaviours of participants (school students, parents and staff) is examined. In each of the models, interviews were conducted and questionnaires were completed with participants. In Model 1 it was found that, overall; the EEIS program did develop positive energy efficient behaviours in those who participated. In relation to whole school effects, mixed results were obtained. In Model 1 a rural school initially reduced energy consumption by fifty percent and in Model 2 significant changes in energy efficient behaviours in the school communities occurred. In Model 3 one school followed through an action plan and similar positive effects were observed. The development of an action plan that is implemented in the school, the selection of suitable participants, and post-program visits to schools by relevant staff were among the factors that contributed to the overall success. Each model was found to have achieved their aims to varying degrees but had outcomes that are likely to have both lifetime and possibly intergenerational effects.

scholarly journals Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 1486-1525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd D. Gerarden ◽  
Richard G. Newell ◽  
Robert N. Stavins
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Efficient ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Market Failures ◽  
Energy Efficiency Gap ◽  
Efficiency Gap

Energy-efficient technologies offer considerable promise for reducing the financial costs and environmental damages associated with energy use, but it has long been observed that these technologies may not be adopted by individuals and firms to the degree that might be justified, even on a purely financial basis. We survey the relevant literature on this “energy-efficiency gap” by presenting two complementary frameworks. First, we divide potential explanations for the energy-efficiency gap into three categories: market failures, behavioral explanations, and model and measurement errors. Second, we organize previous research in terms of the fundamental elements of cost-minimizing energy-efficiency decisions. This provides a decomposition that organizes thinking around four questions. First, are product offerings and pricing economically efficient? Second, are energy operating costs inefficiently priced and/or understood? Third, are product choices cost minimizing in present value terms? Fourth, do other costs inhibit more energy-efficient decisions? We synthesize academic research on these questions, with an emphasis on recent empirical findings, and offer suggestions for future research. (JEL D24, D82, L94, L98, O33, Q41, Q48)

scholarly journals Deconstructing the Energy-Efficiency Gap: Conceptual Frameworks and Evidence

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 183-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd Gerarden ◽  
Richard G. Newell ◽  
Robert N. Stavins
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Efficient ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Market Failures ◽  
Conceptual Frameworks ◽  
Energy Efficiency Gap ◽  
Financial Costs ◽  
Environmental Damages ◽  
Efficiency Gap

Energy-efficient technologies offer considerable promise for reducing the financial costs and environmental damages associated with energy use, but these technologies appear not to be adopted to the degree that appears justified, even on a purely private basis. We present two complementary frameworks for understanding this so-called “energy paradox” or “energy efficiency gap.” First, we build upon previous literature by dividing potential explanations for the energy efficiency gap into three categories: market failures, behavioral anomalies, and model and measurement errors. Second, we examine the elements of cost-minimizing energy efficiency decisions, the typical benchmark used in assessing the gap's magnitude.

scholarly journals Barriers to and Drivers of Energy Management in Swedish SMEs

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (21) ◽  
pp. 6925
Author(s):  
Noor Jalo ◽  
Ida Johansson ◽  
Mariana Andrei ◽  
Therese Nehler ◽  
Patrik Thollander
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Management ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Optimal Level ◽  
Paper Mills ◽  
Energy Efficiency Gap ◽  
Efficiency Measures ◽  
Building Program ◽  
Efficiency Gap

The energy efficiency gap is known as the difference between optimal level of energy efficiency and the actual level of achieved energy efficiency. Energy management has proven to further close the energy efficiency gap. Energy management may differ depending on whether it concerns a large, energy-intensive company or small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs are of high interest since they form a large share of the economy today. For SMEs, a lighter form of energy management, in the form of energy efficiency network participation, has proven to deliver sound energy efficiency impact, while for larger, energy-intensive firms, a certified energy management system may be more suitable. However, various barriers inhibit adoption of energy efficiency measures. While there is an array of research on barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in general, research on barriers to, and driving forces for, energy management is rare, one exception being a study of energy-intensive pulp and paper mills. This holds even more so for industrial SMEs. This paper aims to identify the barriers to, and drivers for, energy management in manufacturing SMEs. Results of this explorative study show that the top four barriers to energy management are lack of time/other priorities, non-energy-related working tasks are prioritized higher, slim organization, and lack of internal expert competences, i.e., mainly organizational barriers. The top four drivers for energy management are to reduce production waste, participation in energy efficiency networks, cost reduction from lower energy use, and commitment from top management. Furthermore, results show that energy management among the studied SMEs seems to not be as mature, even though the companies participated in an energy management capacity building program in the form of energy efficiency networks, which, in turn, shows a still largely untapped potential in the societal aim to reduce the energy efficiency and management gaps. The main contribution of this paper is a first novel attempt to explore barriers to, and drivers for, energy management among SMEs.

scholarly journals Is There an Energy Efficiency Gap?

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hunt Allcott ◽  
Michael Greenstone
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negative Externalities ◽  
Welfare Gains ◽  
Conservation Policies ◽  
Energy Efficiency Gap ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Efficiency Gap ◽  
Central Economic

Many analysts of the energy industry have long believed that energy efficiency offers an enormous “win-win” opportunity: through aggressive energy conservation policies, we can both save money and reduce negative externalities associated with energy use. In 1979, Daniel Yergin and the Harvard Business School Energy Project estimated that the United States could consume 30 or 40 percent less energy without reducing welfare. The central economic question around energy efficiency is whether there are investment inefficiencies that a policy could correct. First, we examine choices made by consumers and firms, testing whether they fail to make investments in energy efficiency that would increase utility or profits. Second, we focus on specific types of investment inefficiencies, testing for evidence consistent with each. Three key conclusions arise: First, the evidence presented in the long literature on the subject frequently does not meet modern standards for credibility. Second, when one tallies up the available empirical evidence from different contexts, it is difficult to substantiate claims of a pervasive Energy Efficiency Gap. Third, it is crucial that policies be targeted. Welfare gains will be larger from a policy that preferentially affects the decisions of those consumers subject to investment inefficiencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document