Costs and benefits of Energy Efficiency Obligations: A review of European programmes

被引:40
|
作者
Rosenow, Jan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bayer, Edith [1 ]
机构
[1] Regulatory Assistance Project, Rue Sci 23, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Univ Sussex, Sussex Energy Grp, Ctr Innovat & Energy Demand, Brighton, E Sussex, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Environm Change Inst, Oxford, England
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
Energy efficiency obligations; Economics; Cost-effectiveness; WHITE CERTIFICATE SCHEMES; MARKET-BASED INSTRUMENTS; CONSERVATION POLICY; STANDARDS; ECONOMICS; GAP; UK;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2017.04.014
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The economics of energy efficiency programmes have been subject to considerable academic debate lasting well over three decades now. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by reviewing the costs and benefits of a specific type of policy+ instrument that recently gained significant traction in Europe Energy Efficiency Obligations - EEOs. Following the introduction of the EU Energy Efficiency Directive in 2012 the number of EEOs in Europe has grown from five schemes to now 16 EEGs in operation or planned across the EU. There is an emerging body of evidence on the costs and benefits of Energy Efficiency Obligations covering a wider range of EU countries, which offers an opportunity to improve our understanding of the economics of Energy Efficiency Obligations. In this paper, we draw on this new data and provide a) a comparative analysis of the costs and benefits of EEOs in a number of European countries, b) discuss the uncertainties and challenges around calculating the costs and benefits of Energy Efficiency Obligations, and c) provide a categorisation of the multiple benefits often overlooked in cost-benefit-analyses.
引用
收藏
页码:53 / 62
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Evaluating the costs and benefits of alternative monitoring programmes for fisheries management
    Punt, AE
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTEGRATED FISHERIES MONITORING, PROCEEDINGS, 1999, : 209 - 222
  • [22] Discounting financial costs and health benefits in public health programmes
    Wald, Nicholas J.
    Oppenheimer, Peter
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2016, 23 (03) : 115 - 115
  • [23] Seasonal relationship of peak demand and energy impacts of energy efficiency measures-a review of evidence in the electric energy efficiency programmes
    Liu, Yingqi
    [J]. ENERGY EFFICIENCY, 2016, 9 (05) : 1015 - 1035
  • [24] Energy Efficiency Obligations and Subsidies to Energy Intensive Industries in Latvia
    Locmelis, Kristaps
    Bariss, Uldis
    Blumberga, Dagnija
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATE TECHNOLOGIES, 2019, 23 (02) : 90 - 101
  • [25] Selling and Saving Energy: Energy Efficiency Obligations in Liberalized Energy Markets
    Giraudet, Louis-Gaetan
    Glachant, Matthieu
    Nicolai, Jean-Philippe
    [J]. ENERGY JOURNAL, 2020, 41 : 191 - 213
  • [26] Implications of an energy efficiency obligation scheme for the Swedish energy-intensive industries: an evaluation of costs and benefits
    Xylia, Maria
    Silveira, Semida
    Morfeldt, Johannes
    [J]. ENERGY EFFICIENCY, 2017, 10 (01) : 151 - 169
  • [27] Implications of an energy efficiency obligation scheme for the Swedish energy-intensive industries: an evaluation of costs and benefits
    Maria Xylia
    Semida Silveira
    Johannes Morfeldt
    [J]. Energy Efficiency, 2017, 10 : 151 - 169
  • [28] Development of a modelling framework in response to new European energy-efficiency regulatory obligations: The Irish experience
    Hull, David
    O Gallachoir, Brian P.
    Walker, Neil
    [J]. ENERGY POLICY, 2009, 37 (12) : 5363 - 5375
  • [29] Assessment of the health-related costs and benefits of upgrading energy efficiency in French housing
    Ezratty, Veronique
    Ormandy, David
    Laurent, Marie-Helene
    Boutiere, Fabienne
    Duburcq, Anne
    Courouve, Laurene
    Cabanes, Pierre-Andre
    [J]. ENVIRONNEMENT RISQUES & SANTE, 2018, 17 (04): : 401 - 410
  • [30] Consolidation of the European treaties: Feasibility, costs, and benefits
    vonBogdandy, A
    Ehlermann, CD
    [J]. COMMON MARKET LAW REVIEW, 1996, 33 (06): : 1107 - 1116