Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Earth Science

ISSN 2095-0195

ISSN 2095-0209(Online)

CN 11-5982/P

Postal Subscription Code 80-963

2018 Impact Factor: 1.205

Front. Earth Sci.    2014, Vol. 8 Issue (1) : 3-17    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-013-0410-y
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Pricing strategies in inelastic energy markets: can we use less if we can’t extract more?
Alexey Voinov1(), Tatiana Filatova2
1. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, University of Twente, Enschede 7522EA, The Netherlands
2. Centre for Studies in Technology and Sustainable Development, University of Twente, Enschede 7522EA, The Netherlands
 Download: PDF(357 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Limited supply of nonrenewable energy resources under growing energy demand creates a situation when a marginal change in the quantity supplied or demanded causes non-marginal swings in price levels. The situation is worsened by the fact that we are currently running out of cheap energy resources at the global scale while adaptation to climate change requires extra energy costs. It is often argued that technology and alternative energy will be a solution. However, alternative energy infrastructure also requires additional energy investments, which can further increase the gap between energy demand and supply. This paper presents an explorative model that demonstrates that a smooth transition from an oil-based economy to alternative energy sources is possible only if it is started well in advance while fossil resources are still abundant. Later the transition looks much more dramatic and it becomes risky to rely entirely on technological solutions. It becomes increasingly likely that in addition to technological solutions that can increase supply we will need to find ways to decrease demand and consumption. We further argue that market mechanisms can be just as powerful tools to curb demand as they have traditionally been for stimulating consumption. We observe that individuals who consume more energy resources benefit at the expense of those who consume less, effectively imposing price externalities on the latters. We suggest two transparent and flexible methods of pricing that attempt to eliminate price externalities on energy resources. Such pricing schemes stimulate less consumption and can smooth the transition to renewable energy.

Keywords peak oil      price externality      alternative energy resources      EROEI     
Corresponding Author(s): Alexey Voinov   
Issue Date: 05 March 2014
 Cite this article:   
Alexey Voinov,Tatiana Filatova. Pricing strategies in inelastic energy markets: can we use less if we can’t extract more?[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2014, 8(1): 3-17.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-013-0410-y
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2014/V8/I1/3
Fig.1  Demand curve for Critical Natural Capital (Farley and Gaddis, 2007).
Fig.2  Supply curve for crude oil (1970-2013). Price of oil (nominal and real, Aug. 2013 $$ per barrel) versus world oil production (thousands of barrels) (EIA, 2013a).
Variable Meaning Value
R0 Initial World reserve of oil (Greene et al., 2004) in petaBTU (1015) 16000
cd The 0.025% growth rate of demand—see Appendix 0.025
eini Initial EROEI when oil was plentiful (Cleveland et al., 1984; Hall et al., 1986) 100
ea_min Original low EROEI for alternative sources of energy, meaning that they may have been explored even when at first they were energetically inefficient to use 1
ea_max Maximal EROEI for alternatives. See http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3910 for a summary. For photovoltaics the range is 3-33. For wind the average is 25 and can be as high as 78 (Kubiszewski et al., 2008). For hydropower the range is 100-300 (Gagnon et al., 2002). The value can still grow in the future when new alternative sources will be discovered (cold fusion?). 40
ea_hs Coefficient that gives us the productivity of alternatives when their EROEI is half of the maximal. The smaller this value the faster we transition from the low initial e a_min to the high e a_max . With 500,000 EROEI for alternatives grows very fast so we can certainly use it for a best case scenario 500,000
ac Constant supply of alternatives when they are not really recognized as such. It is some background research on various sources of energy that are still not quite economically feasible. The model is not sensitive to this coefficient 0.00001
a Growth rate of alternative technology once it is recognized as a feasible substitute for conventional energy sources (50% is actually a very optimistic estimate (El-Ashry, 2010)) 0.5
eT Threshold e when the decision is made to invest and develop alternatives. Let us use the higher estimate of the current E that we have for oil. In fact it is probably around 10 or less (Cleveland et al., 1984; Hall et al., 1986). 20
Tab.1  Model parameters
Fig.3  The alternative energy is starting to develop but it is too late. The EROEI of conventional energy falls to 1 as the reserves dwindle, making further extraction impossible.
Fig.4  Early investment in Alternatives, while there is still ample supply of conventional energy, allows for a smooth transition to renewable energy.
Fig.5  A simple pricing scheme for electric consumption. Those who consume less than the average are rewarded by lower energy rates, while the big spenders get energy at a higher per kWh per capita rate.
Fig.6  Incentive pricing scheme with the break point set lower than average to make sure that there will be no deficit in the system.
Fig.7  Asymmetric pricing schemes.
  Fig. A1 Before the oil crisis of the 1970’s the growth of oil consumption was very well approximated by the equation y = 0.7 e 0.045 t, where t is time.
  Fig. A2 The oil crisis of the 1970’s has changed the equation to y = 4 e 0.025 t, where t is time. Overall the growth rate is now better estimated at 2.5% per year.
  Fig. A3 The s-shaped dependency between EROEI index and the amount of reserves still available. The less reserves are left the more we need to invest to produce it.
  Fig. A4 Dynamics of EROEI as resources become scarcer.
1 W B Arthur (2006). Out-of-equilibrium economics and agent-based modeling. In: L Tesfatsion, K L Judd eds. Handbook of Computational Economics Volume 2: Agent-Based Computational Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V., 1551–1564
2 R U Ayres, L W Ayres, B Warr (2003). Exergy, power and work in the US economy, 1900–1998. Energy, 28(3): 219–273
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00089-0
3 C Bartusch, F Wallin, M Odlare, I Vassileva, L Wester (2011). Introducing a demand-based electricity distribution tariff in the residential sector: demand response and customer perception. Energy Policy, 39(9): 5008–5025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.013
4 S C Bhattacharyya (1996). Domestic energy pricing policies in developing countries: why are economic prescriptions shelved? Energy Sources, 18(8): 855–874
https://doi.org/10.1080/00908319608908818
5 W A Brock, A Xepapadeas (2004). Management of interacting species: regulation under nonlinearities and hysteresis. Resour Energy Econ, 26(2): 137–156
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2003.11.004
6 D S Brookshire, H S Burness, J M Chermak, K Krause (2002). Western urban water demand. Nat Resour J, 2(4): 873–898
7 P Cheshire, S Sheppard (2005). The introduction of price signals into land use planning decision-making: a proposal. Urban Stud, 42(4): 647–663
https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980500060210
8 J Chow, R J Kopp, P R Portney (2003). Energy resources and global development. Science, 302(5650): 1528–1531
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091939 pmid: 14645838
9 C J Cleveland, R Costanza, C A S Hall, R Kaufmann (1984). Energy and the U.S. economy: a biophysical perspective. Science, 225(4665): 890–897
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.225.4665.890 pmid: 17779848
10 R Costanza, M Hart, S Posner, J Talberth (2009). Beyond GDP: the need for new measures of progress. The Pardee Papers 4: 46
11 H Daly, J Farley (2004). Ecological Economics. Washington D C: Island Press
12 J W Day Jr, C A Hall, A Yanez-Arancibia, D Pimentel, C I Marti, W J Mitsch (2009). Ecology in times of scarcity. Bioscience, 59(4): 321–331
https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.4.10
13 J Diamond (2005). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.New York: Penguin,1–576
14 P R Ehrlich, A H Ehrlich (2009). The Dominant Animal: Human Evolution and the Environment. Washington D C: Island press, 480 p
15 P R Ehrlich, A H Ehrlich (2013). Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280 (1754).
16 EIA (2002). Annual Energy Review 2001. Energy Information Administration : DOE/EIA-0384, 432p
17 EIA (2013). Annual Energy Outlook 2013. US DOE, 244p
18 EIA (2013a). Short-term Energy Outlook. Release Date: August 6, 2013, Energy Information Administration.
19 O Ekins, C Folke, R De Groot (2003). Identifying critical natural capital. Ecol Econ, 44(2 – 3): 159–163
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00271-9
20 El-Ashry M (2010). Renewables 2010 Global Status Report. Paris: REN21 Secretariat. Copyright Deutsche (GTZ) GmbH
21 M Fader, D Gerten, M Krause, W Lucht, W Cramer (2013). Spatial decoupling of agricultural production and consumption: quantifying dependences of countries on food imports due to domestic land and water constraints. Environmental Research Letters, 8 (1): 014046.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/014046
22 J Farley, E Gaddis (2007). An ecological economic assessment of restoration. In: J Aronson, S Milton, J Blignaut eds. Restoring Natural Capital: Science, Business and Practice. Washington DC: Island Press
23 M T Firrisa, I van Duren, A Voinov (2013). Energy Efficiency for Rapeseed Biod iesel Production in Different Farming Systems. Energy Efficiency, 1–17 .
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-013-9201-2
24 L Gagnon, C Belanger, Y Uchiyama (2002). Life-cycle assessment of electricity generation options: the status of research in year 2001. Energy Policy, 30(14): 1267–1278
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00088-5
25 J Gever (1986). Beyond Oil (3rd edition). New York: Harper Business
26 K D Goldin (1975). Price externalities influence public-policy. Public Choice, 23(1): 1–10
27 J Gowdy, J Roxana (2005). Technology and Petroleum Exhaustion: Evidence from Two Mega-Oilfields. Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics
28 D L Greene (1997). Oil dependence: the value of R&D. Proceedings of the Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference. Volume 3, 2148–2153
29 D L Greene, J L Hopson, J Li (2004). Running out of and into oil: analyzing global oil depletion and transition through 2050. Energy and Environmental Concerns, 2004(1880): 1–9
30 L N Gumilev (1990). Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere. Moscow: Progress Publishers
31 C A S Hall, C J Cleveland, R Kaufmann (1986). Energy and Resource Quality: The Ecology of the Economic Process. New York: John Wiley and Sons
32 C A S Hall, J W Day (2009). Revisiting the limits to growth after peak oil In the 1970s a rising world population and the finite resources available to support it were hot topics. Interest faded-but it's time to take another look. Am Sci, 97(3): 230–237
https://doi.org/10.1511/2009.78.230
33 M Höök, R Hirsch, K Aleklett (2009). Giant oil field decline rates and their influence on world oil production. Energy Policy, 37(6): 2262–2272 .
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.02.020
34 M K Hubbert (1950). Energy from fossil fuels. Washington D C, American Association for the Advancement of Science Centennial: 171–177
35 J D Hughes (2013). Energy: a reality check on the shale revolution. Nature, 494 (7437): 307–8 .
https://doi.org/10.1038/494307a
36 IEA (2007). Medium-Term Oil Market Report. L Eagles ed, International Energy Agency
37 IEA (2011). World Enegy Outlook. In IEA, 666
38 V Irastorza (2005). New metering enables simplified and more efficient rate structures. Electr J, 18(10): 53–61
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2005.10.008
39 C H Kahl (2006). States, Scarcity, Civil Strife in the Developing World. Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press
40 D S Kenney, C Goemans, R Klein, J Lowrey, K Reidy (2008). Residential water demand management: lessons from Aurora, Colorado. J Am Water Resour Assoc, 44(1): 192–207
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00147.x
41 R A Kerr (2008). Energy. World oil crunch looming? Science, 322(5905): 1178–1179
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.322.5905.1178 pmid: 19023054
42 P R Krugman (1979). Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international-trade. J Int Econ, 9(4): 469–479
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1996(79)90017-5
43 I Kubiszewski, C J Cleveland, P K Endres (2008). Energy return on investment (EROI) for wind energy. In: C J Clevelanded. Encyclopedia of Earth. last updated June 18, 2008
44 A Levermann, P U Clark, B Marzeion, G A Milne, D Pollard, V Radic, A Robinson (2013). The multimillennial sea-level commitment of global warming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (July 15): 1–6 .
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219414110
45 R G Lipsey, P N Courant, D D Purvis, P O Steiner (1993). Microeconomics (10th Edition). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers Inc
46 H A Loaiciga, S Renehan (1997). Municipal water use and water rates driven by severe drought: a case study. J Am Water Resour Assoc, 33(6): 1313–1326
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1997.tb03555.x
47 T R Malthus (1826). An Essay on the Principle of Population. London: John Murray. Library of Economics and Liberty [Online]
48 M Meinshausen, N Meinshausen, W Hare, S C B Raper, K Frieler, R Knutti, D J Frame, M R Allen (2009). Greenhouse-gas Emission Targets for Limiting Global Warming to 2 °C. Nature, 458 (7242): 1158–1162
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08017
49 K Mulder, N J Hagens (2008). Energy return on investment: toward a consistent framework. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 37(2): 74–79
50 M Munasinghe, P Meier (1993). Energy Policy Analysis and Modeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
51 D J Murphy, C Hall, B Powers (2010). New perspectives on the energy return on (energy) investment (EROI) of corn ethanol. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 13 (1): 179–202 .
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9255-14
52 J Murray, D King (2012). Climate policy: oil’s tipping point has passed. Nature, 481(7382): 433–435
https://doi.org/10.1038/481433a pmid: 22281577
53 R K Pachauri, A Reisinger (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Geneva, Switzerland, IPCC
54 W E Rees, M Wackernagel, P Testemale (1998). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers
55 J L Simon (1998). The Ultimate Resource II. Princeton: Princeton University Press
56 S Solomon, G K Plattner, R Knutti, P Friedlingstein (2009). Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 106(6): 1704–1709
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812721106 pmid: 19179281
57 N Stern (2008). The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
58 A Trewavas (2002). Malthus foiled again and again. Nature, 418(6898): 668–670
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01013 pmid: 12167872
59 A Voinov (2008). Systems Science and Modeling for Ecological Economics. Elsevier, Academic Press
60 J B. Whitcomb (2005). Florida water rates evaluation of single-family homes. Report to South Florida Water Management District: 113
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed