Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'electricity prices'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Viewing papers 1 through 7 of 7
-
Working PaperTechnology Lock-In and Costs of Delayed Climate Policy
July 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-33
This paper studies the implications of current energy prices for future energy efficiency and climate policy. Using U.S. Census microdata and quasi-experimental variation in energy prices, we first show that manufacturing plants that open when electricity prices are low consume more energy throughout their lifetime, regardless of current electricity prices. We then estimate that a persistent bias of technological change toward energy can explain the long-term effects of entry-year electricity prices on energy intensity. Overall, this 'technology lock-in' implies that increasing entry-year electricity prices by 10% would decrease a plant's energy intensity of production by 3% throughout its lifetime.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe U.S. Manufacturing Sector's Response to Higher Electricity Prices: Evidence from State-Level Renewable Portfolio Standards
October 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-47
While several papers examine the effects of renewable portfolio standards (RPS) on electricity prices, they mainly rely on state-level data and there has been little research on how RPS policies affect manufacturing activity via their effect on electricity prices. Using plant-level data for the entire U.S. manufacturing sector and all electric utilities from 1992 ' 2015, we jointly estimate the effect of RPS adoption and stringency on plant-level electricity prices and production decisions. To ensure that our results are not sensitive to possible pre-existing differences across manufacturing plants in RPS and non-RPS states, we implement coarsened exact covariate matching. Our results suggest that electricity prices for plants in RPS states averaged about 2% higher than in non-RPS states, notably lower than prior estimates based on state-level data. In response to these higher electricity prices, we estimate that plant electricity usage declined by 1.2% for all plants and 1.8% for energy-intensive plants, broadly consistent with published estimates of the elasticity of electricity demand for industrial users. We find smaller declines in output, employment, and hours worked (relative to the decline in electricity use). Finally, several key RPS policy design features that vary substantially from state-to-state produce heterogeneous effects on plant-level electricity prices.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperHow Does State-Level Carbon Pricing in the United States Affect Industrial Competitiveness?
June 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-21
Pricing carbon emissions from an individual jurisdiction may harm the competitiveness of local firms, causing the leakage of emissions and economic activity to other regions. Past research concentrates on national carbon prices, but the impacts of subnational carbon prices could be more severe due to the openness of regional economies. We specify a flexible model to capture competition between a plant in a state with electric sector carbon pricing and plants in other states or countries without such pricing. Treating energy prices as a proxy for carbon prices, we estimate model parameters using confidential plant-level Census data, 1982'2011. We simulate the effects on manufacturing output and employment of carbon prices covering the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions. A carbon price of $10 per metric ton on electricity output reduces employment in the regulated region by 2.7 percent, and raises employment in nearby states by 0.8 percent, although these estimates do not account for revenue recycling in the RGGI region that could mitigate these employment changes. The effects on output are broadly similar. National employment falls just 0.1 percent, suggesting that domestic plants in other states as opposed to foreign facilities are the principal winners from state or regional carbon pricing.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperCogeneration Technology Adoption in the U.S.
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-30
Well over half of all electricity generated in recent years in Denmark is through cogeneration. In U.S., however, this number is only roughly eight percent. While both the federal and state governments provided regulatory incentives for more cogeneration adoption, the capacity added in the past five years have been the lowest since late 1970s. My goal is to first understand what are and their relative importance of the factors that drive cogeneration technology adoption, with an emphasis on estimating the elasticity of adoption with respect to relative energy input prices and regulatory factors. Very preliminary results show that with a 1 cent increase in purchased electricity price from 6 cents (roughly current average) to 7 cents per kwh, the likelihood of cogeneration technology adoption goes up by about 0.7-1 percent. Then I will try to address the general equilibrium effect of cogeneration adoption in the electricity generation sector as a whole and potentially estimate some key parameters that the social planner would need to determine the optimal cogeneration investment amount. Partial equilibrium setting does not consider the decrease in investment in the utilities sector when facing competition from the distributed electricity generators, and therefore ignore the effects from the change in equilibrium price of electricity. The competitive market equilibrium setting does not consider the externality in the reduction of CO2 emissions, and leads to socially sub-optimal investment in cogeneration. If we were to achieve the national goal to increase cogeneration capacity half of the current capacity by 2020, the US Department of Energy (DOE) estimated an annual reduction of 150 million metric tons of CO2 annually ' equivalent to the emissions from over 25 million cars. This is about five times the annual carbon reduction from deregulation and consolidation in the US nuclear power industry (Davis, Wolfram 2012). Although the DOE estimates could be an overly optimistic estimate, it nonetheless suggests the large potential in the adoption of cogeneration technology.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEnergy Prices, Pass-Through, and Incidence in U.S. Manufacturing*
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-27
This paper studies how increases in energy input costs for production are split between consumers and producers via changes in product prices (i.e., pass-through). We show that in markets characterized by imperfect competition, marginal cost pass-through, a demand elasticity, and a price-cost markup are suffcient to characterize the relative change in welfare between producers and consumers due to a change in input costs. We and that increases in energy prices lead to higher plant-level marginal costs and output prices but lower markups. This suggests that marginal cost pass-through is incomplete, with estimates centered around 0.7. Our confidence intervals reject both zero pass-through and complete pass-through. We and heterogeneous incidence of changes in input prices across industries, with consumers bearing a smaller share of the burden than standards methods suggest.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperProductivity Dispersion and Input Prices: The Case of Electricity
September 2008
Working Paper Number:
CES-08-33
We exploit a rich new database on Prices and Quantities of Electricity in Manufacturing (PQEM) to study electricity productivity in the U.S. manufacturing sector. The database contains nearly 2 million customer-level observations (i.e., manufacturing plants) from 1963 to 2000. It allows us to construct plant-level measures of price paid per kWh, output per kWh, output per dollar spent on electric power and labor productivity. Using this database, we first document tremendous dispersion among U.S. manufacturing plants in electricity productivity measures and a strong negative relationship between price per kWh and output per kWh hour within narrowly defined industries. Using an IV strategy to isolate exogenous price variation, we estimate that the average elasticity of output per kWh with respect to the price of electricity is about 0.6 during the period from 1985 to 2000. We also develop evidence that this price-physical efficiency tradeoff is stronger for industries with bigger electricity cost shares. Finally, we develop evidence that stronger competitive pressures in the output market lead to less dispersion among manufacturing plants in price per kWh and in electricity productivity measures. The strength of competition effects on dispersion is similar for electricity productivity and labor productivity.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperElectricity Pricing to U.S. Manufacturing Plants, 1963-2000
October 2007
Working Paper Number:
CES-07-28
We construct a large customer-level database and use it to study electricity pricing patterns from 1963 to 2000. The data show tremendous cross-sectional dispersion in the electricity prices paid by manufacturing plants, reflecting spatial price differences and quantity discounts. Price dispersion declined sharply between 1967 and 1977 because of erosion in quantity discounts. To estimate the role of cost factors and markups in quantity discounts, we exploit differences among utilities in the purchases distribution of their customers. The estimation results reveal that supply costs per watt-hour decline by more than half over the range of customer-level purchases in the data, regardless of time period. Prior to the mid 1970s, marginal price and marginal cost schedules with respect to annual purchase quantity are remarkably similar, in line with efficient pricing. In later years, marginal supply costs exceed marginal prices for smaller manufacturing customers by 10% or more. The evidence provides no support for a standard Ramsey-pricing interpretation of quantity discounts on the margin we study. Spatial dispersion in retail electricity prices among states, counties and utility service territories is large, rises over time for smaller purchasers, and does not diminish as wholesale power markets expand in the 1990s.View Full Paper PDF
1
Total Results: 7
