Energy Substitution, Technical Change and Rebound Effects
Energy Substitution, Technical Change and Rebound Effects
复制标题
DOI：
10.2139/ssrn.2742196
复制
发表时间：
2014-08
影响因子：
29.4
通讯作者：
S. Sorrell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Sorrell
本文考察了生产者提高能效、能源和其他投入之间的替代程度以及由此产生的“反弹效应”的大小之间的关系。从根本上说，更容易的替补会带来更大的篮板。本文侧重于概念和方法问题，强调了借助生产和成本函数估计和模拟反弹效应的挑战，并质疑这一领域证据基础的稳健性。它认为，“替代弹性”的多种定义是混乱的根源，最常见的估计弹性几乎没有实际价值，经验文献相互矛盾，容易产生偏见，很难使用，而且这些文献与能源经济模型中使用的假设之间只有微弱的联系。虽然“能量增强型技术变化”为估计反弹效应提供了自变量的自然选择，但大多数实证研究没有估计这种形式的技术变化，许多建模研究没有模拟它，其他一些模拟它的方式低估了反弹效应。因此，本文认为，目前的计量经济学和模型研究并不能为不同工业部门的反弹效应的大小提供可靠的指导。
This paper investigates the relationships between energy efficiency improvements by producers, the ease of substitution between energy and other inputs and the size of the resulting “rebound effects”. Fundamentally, easier substitution leads to larger rebounds. Focusing upon conceptual and methodological issues, the paper highlights the challenges of estimating and modeling rebound effects with the help of production and cost functions and questions the robustness of the evidence base in this area. It argues that the multiple definitions of “elasticities of substitution” are a source of confusion, the most commonly estimated elasticity is of little practical value, the empirical literature is contradictory, prone to bias and difficult to use and there are only tenuous links between this literature and the assumptions used within energy-economic models. While “energy-augmenting technical change” provides the natural choice of independent variable for an estimate of rebound effects, most empirical studies do not estimate this form of technical change, many modeling studies do not simulate it and others simulate it in such a way as to underestimate rebound effects. As a result, the paper argues that current econometric and modeling studies do not provide reliable guidance on the magnitude of rebound effects in different industrial sectors.