Energy paradox and political intervention: A stochastic model for the case of electrical equipments |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Laboratory of Research in Applied Microeconomics, High School of Economic Sciences and Commercials, Tunis University, 4 AbouZakaria El Hafsi Street, 1089 Montfleury, Tunisia;2. L@bISEN, ISEN-Brest, 20 Cuirassé Bretagne, CS 42807, 29228 Brest, Cedex 2, France;3. Laboratory of Research in Applied Microeconomics, Institut des hautes Etudes Sousse, Campus universitaire-Boukhzar, 4000 Sousse, Tunisia;1. Sustainable Energy Division, Izmir University of Economics, Turkey;2. Department of Logistics Management, Business School, Izmir University of Economics, Turkey;3. Faculty of Economics, National Technical University Kharkiv Polytechnic Institute, Ukraine;1. CGSB, Curtin University, Perth, Australia;2. College of Materials and Energy, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China;1. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zurich), Department of Management, Technology, and Economics, Chair of Sustainability and Technology, Weinbergstrasse 56/58, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland;2. Member of the Swiss Parliament and the Committees for the Environment, Spatial Planning and Energy (CESPE) |
| |
Abstract: | This paper develops a model that explains the delay of decisions to adopt profitable energy-saving investments. This problem is known as the energy paradox. The model rationalizes the profitability requirements raised by the irreversibility, the uncertainty and the decrease of costs as a result of learning by doing. In this context, the wait gives investors more visibility and more lower investment costs, which gives them an option value. The representative agent has an interest to postpone its energy saving decision until future benefits increase and equalize its required option value. Formally, we internalize these explanatory factors in a stochastic model where the updated energy saving benefits follows a geometric Brownian motion. To affirm the capacity of the model, we generate simulation results for two equipments for electrical uses. Beyond that, we extend the model to simulate the effects of energy policy instruments to promote adoption of such equipments. Simulations prove that the taxation of energy prices is likely to be more effective than the subsidy for energy-saving equipments. It is also found that the combination of these instruments amplifies the adoption of energy-saving equipments and generates very favorable economic and environmental externalities. |
| |
Keywords: | Hurdle rate Option value Energy efficiency gap Experience curve Stochastic model Policy instrument |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|