Based on sectoral, or partial equilibrium, analyses, energy conservation has been offered as a "no regrets" COz mitigation strategy. Ours is the first study to isolate key features of conservation strategies in a general equilibrium context. The results indicate that conservation would have slightly negative effects on the U.S. economy overall, in addition to sizable negative effects on most energy industries. Thus, while conservation may be a worthy C02 mitigation strategy, it should not be oversold as costless.
AyresR.SimonisU. (1994). Industrial Metabolism: Restructuring for Sustainable Development, New York: United Nations University Press.
2.
BarrettS.GrubbM.RolandK.RoseA.SandorR.TietenbergT. (1992). Combating Global Warming: A Global System of Tradeable Carbon Emission Entitlements, Geneva, Switzerland: UNCTAD.
3.
BerndtE.WoodD. (1975). “Technology, Prices, and the Derived Demand for Energy,” Review of Economics and Statistics57: 259-68.
4.
BerndtE.WoodD. (1979). “Engineering and Econometric Interpretations of Energy-Capital Complementarity,” American Economic Review69: 342-54.
5.
BoydR.KrutillaK.ViscusiW. K. (1995). “Energy Taxation as a Policy Instrument to Reduce C02 Emissions: A Net Benefit Analysis,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management29: 1-24.
6.
BurniauxJ.MartinJ. P.NicolettiG.MartinsJ. O. (1992). “Green: A Multi-sector, Multi-region General Equilibrium Model for Quantifying the Costs of Curbing C02 Emissions: A Technical Manual,” Working Papers, No. 116, Economics Department, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
7.
ClineW. (1992). The Economics of Global Warming, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.
8.
DervisK.de MeloJ.RobinsonS. (1982). General Equilibrium Models for Development Policy, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
9.
DuchinF.LangeG.M. (1994). The Future of the Environment, New York: Oxford University Press.
10.
ElliottR. (1994). Electricity Consumption and the Potential for Electric Energy Savings in the Manufacturing Sector, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, DC.
11.
Energy Information Administration (1988). International Energy Annual, Washington, DC.
12.
GriffinJ.GregoryP. (1976). “An Intercountry Translog Model of Energy Substitution Responses,” American Economic Review76: 24-28.
13.
HansonK.RobinsonS. (1994). “U.S. Social Accounting Matrix, 1987,” Economic Research Service, Washington, DC: USDA.
14.
HazillaM.KoppR. (1990). “Social Cost of Environmental Quality Regulations: A General Equilibrium Analysis,” Journal of Political Economy98: 853-73.
15.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1991). Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment (revised), New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
16.
JaccardM.NyboerJ.FogwillA. (1993). “How Big is the Electricity Conservation Potential in Industry?” The Energy Journal14(2): 139-56.
17.
JorgensonD.WilcoxenP. (1993). “Reducing U.S. Carbon Emissions: An Econometric General Equilibrium Assessment,” Resource and Energy Economics15: 7-25.
18.
KhazzoomD. (1980). “Economic Implications of Mandated Efficiency Standards for Household Appliances,” The Energy Journal1: 21-39.
19.
LaitnerS., (1995). Energy Efficiency and Economic Development in the Midwest, American Council for An Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, DC.
20.
LinS. (1991). A Computable General Equilibrium Model for U.S. Mineral Policy Analysis, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Mineral Resource Economics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
21.
LovinsA.LovinsH.(1991). “Least-Cost Climatic Stabilization,” Annual Review of Energy and the Environment16: 433-531.
22.
ManneA.RichelsR.(1991). “Global C02 Emission Reductions: The Impacts of Rising Energy Costs,” The Energy Journal12(1): 87-107.
23.
ManneA.RichelsR. (1992). Buying Greenhouse Insurance, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
MontgomeryW. D. (1992). “The Carbon Tax, The Environment, and Economic Growth,” paper presented at the Symposium on Enhancing Environmental Quality Through Economic Growth, Washington, DC.
25.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (1991). Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26.
NordhausW. (1991). “The Cost of Slowing Climate Change: A Survey,” The Energy Journal12(1): 35-67.
27.
NordhausW. (1993). “Rolling the DICE: The Optimal Transition Path for Controlling Greenhouse Gases,” Resource and Energy Economics15: 27-50.
28.
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) (1991). Changing by Degrees: Steps to Reduce Greenhouse Gases, Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment.
29.
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) (1993). Industrial Energy Efficiency, Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment.
30.
PezzeyJ. (1992). “The Symmetry between Controlling Pollution by Price and by Quantity,” Canadian Journal of Economics25: 983-91.
31.
RoseA.StevensB. (1993). “The Efficiency and Equity of Marketable Permits for C02 Emissions, Resource and Energy Economics15: 117-46.
32.
RoseA.StevensB.LiP. (1994). “A Global Marketable Permits Approach to C02 Mitigation: Implications for U.S. Energy Demand,” in E. C. Van Ierland (ed.) International Environmental Economics, Amsterdam: Elsevier.
33.
ShovenJ. B.WhalleyJ. (1992). Applying General Equilibrium, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34.
SolowJ. L. (1987). “The Capital-Energy Complementarity Debate Revisited,” American Economic Review4: 605-614.
35.
Task Force on the Comprehensive Approach to Climate Change (1991). A Comprehensive Approach to Addressing Potential Climate Change, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC.
36.
WeitzmanM. (1974). “Prices vs. Quantities,” Review of Economic Studies41: 447-91.
37.
WrightB. (1980). “The Cost of Tax-Induced Energy Conservation,” Bell Journal of Economics11: 84-107.
38.
World Resources Institute (1994). World Resources: 1993-94, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
