关于 "通过动态处理效果评估住宅部门燃气消耗的能效措施的有效性:来自英格兰和威尔士的证据"

IF 13.6 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Cristina Peñasco , Laura Diaz Anadon
{"title":"关于 \"通过动态处理效果评估住宅部门燃气消耗的能效措施的有效性:来自英格兰和威尔士的证据\"","authors":"Cristina Peñasco ,&nbsp;Laura Diaz Anadon","doi":"10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107946","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In our previous publication “Assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures in the residential sector gas consumption through dynamic treatment effects: Evidence from England and Wales”, we analyzed the impact of the implementation of energy efficiency (EE) measures, in particular loft insulation and cavity walls, on household gas consumption up to five years after installation. Upon review, we realized that our phrasing, specifically the term “energy savings disappear,” might have led to misunderstandings regarding our findings. In this commentary, we clarify that our results indicate reductions in the level of energy (gas) savings achieved, two to four years after the implementation of the energy efficiency measures. The adoption of EE measures is associated with significant reductions in household residential gas consumption one year after their implementation, as we expressed in Peñasco and Anadon (2023). However, the level of savings decreases four years after the retrofitting of cavity wall insulation measures and two years after the installation of loft insulation, generating increases in consumption with respect to the maximum level of savings achieved, i.e., rebounds in consumption. We find that, after five years, energy savings from loft installations are still positive, in the range of 4–5 % compared to the control group—a level of savings that represents a rebound of about 20–25 %, when compared to the maximum level of savings that occurs two years after installation. For cavity walls, after five years gas savings are in the range of 6–9 % compared to the control group, with rebounds of about 10–13 % compared to the maximum savings in year two. This clarification is crucial to prevent a misinterpretation of the results in future research and policy making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11665,"journal":{"name":"Energy Economics","volume":"139 ","pages":"Article 107946"},"PeriodicalIF":13.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comment on “Assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures in the residential sector gas consumption through dynamic treatment effects: Evidence from England and Wales”\",\"authors\":\"Cristina Peñasco ,&nbsp;Laura Diaz Anadon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107946\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In our previous publication “Assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures in the residential sector gas consumption through dynamic treatment effects: Evidence from England and Wales”, we analyzed the impact of the implementation of energy efficiency (EE) measures, in particular loft insulation and cavity walls, on household gas consumption up to five years after installation. Upon review, we realized that our phrasing, specifically the term “energy savings disappear,” might have led to misunderstandings regarding our findings. In this commentary, we clarify that our results indicate reductions in the level of energy (gas) savings achieved, two to four years after the implementation of the energy efficiency measures. The adoption of EE measures is associated with significant reductions in household residential gas consumption one year after their implementation, as we expressed in Peñasco and Anadon (2023). However, the level of savings decreases four years after the retrofitting of cavity wall insulation measures and two years after the installation of loft insulation, generating increases in consumption with respect to the maximum level of savings achieved, i.e., rebounds in consumption. We find that, after five years, energy savings from loft installations are still positive, in the range of 4–5 % compared to the control group—a level of savings that represents a rebound of about 20–25 %, when compared to the maximum level of savings that occurs two years after installation. For cavity walls, after five years gas savings are in the range of 6–9 % compared to the control group, with rebounds of about 10–13 % compared to the maximum savings in year two. This clarification is crucial to prevent a misinterpretation of the results in future research and policy making.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Economics\",\"volume\":\"139 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107946\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988324006546\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988324006546","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在我们之前的出版物 "通过动态处理效应评估节能措施对住宅部门燃气消耗量的影响:英格兰和威尔士的证据 "中,我们分析了节能措施(尤其是阁楼隔热和空心墙)在安装后五年内对家庭燃气消耗量的影响。经过回顾,我们意识到我们的措辞,特别是 "节能效果消失 "一词,可能会导致人们对我们的研究结果产生误解。在本评论中,我们澄清,我们的结果表明,在实施节能措施两到四年后,所实现的节能(燃气)水平有所下降。正如我们在 Peñasco 和 Anadon(2023 年)一书中所表述的,节能措施实施一年后,家庭住宅燃气消耗量会显著减少。然而,在加装空腔墙隔热措施四年后和安装阁楼隔热设施两年后,节约水平会下降,从而导致消耗量相对于最大节约水平的增加,即消耗量的反弹。我们发现,五年后,阁楼保温隔热设施的节能效果仍然良好,与对照组相比,节能效果在 4-5% 之间,与安装两年后的最大节能效果相比,节能效果反弹了约 20-25%。就空心墙而言,与对照组相比,五年后的燃气节约率为 6-9%,与第二年的最大节约率相比,反弹率约为 10-13%。为了防止在未来的研究和政策制定中对结果产生误解,这一说明至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comment on “Assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures in the residential sector gas consumption through dynamic treatment effects: Evidence from England and Wales”
In our previous publication “Assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures in the residential sector gas consumption through dynamic treatment effects: Evidence from England and Wales”, we analyzed the impact of the implementation of energy efficiency (EE) measures, in particular loft insulation and cavity walls, on household gas consumption up to five years after installation. Upon review, we realized that our phrasing, specifically the term “energy savings disappear,” might have led to misunderstandings regarding our findings. In this commentary, we clarify that our results indicate reductions in the level of energy (gas) savings achieved, two to four years after the implementation of the energy efficiency measures. The adoption of EE measures is associated with significant reductions in household residential gas consumption one year after their implementation, as we expressed in Peñasco and Anadon (2023). However, the level of savings decreases four years after the retrofitting of cavity wall insulation measures and two years after the installation of loft insulation, generating increases in consumption with respect to the maximum level of savings achieved, i.e., rebounds in consumption. We find that, after five years, energy savings from loft installations are still positive, in the range of 4–5 % compared to the control group—a level of savings that represents a rebound of about 20–25 %, when compared to the maximum level of savings that occurs two years after installation. For cavity walls, after five years gas savings are in the range of 6–9 % compared to the control group, with rebounds of about 10–13 % compared to the maximum savings in year two. This clarification is crucial to prevent a misinterpretation of the results in future research and policy making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Economics
Energy Economics ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
18.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
524
期刊介绍: Energy Economics is a field journal that focuses on energy economics and energy finance. It covers various themes including the exploitation, conversion, and use of energy, markets for energy commodities and derivatives, regulation and taxation, forecasting, environment and climate, international trade, development, and monetary policy. The journal welcomes contributions that utilize diverse methods such as experiments, surveys, econometrics, decomposition, simulation models, equilibrium models, optimization models, and analytical models. It publishes a combination of papers employing different methods to explore a wide range of topics. The journal's replication policy encourages the submission of replication studies, wherein researchers reproduce and extend the key results of original studies while explaining any differences. Energy Economics is indexed and abstracted in several databases including Environmental Abstracts, Fuel and Energy Abstracts, Social Sciences Citation Index, GEOBASE, Social & Behavioral Sciences, Journal of Economic Literature, INSPEC, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信