Climatic Change

, Volume 109, Supplement 1, pp 191–210 | Cite as

Simulating the impacts of climate change, prices and population on California’s residential electricity consumption

  • Maximilian AuffhammerEmail author
  • Anin Aroonruengsawat


This study simulates the impacts of higher temperatures resulting from anthropogenic climate change on residential electricity consumption for California. Flexible temperature response functions are estimated by climate zone, which allow for differential effects of days in different temperature bins on households’ electricity consumption. The estimation uses a comprehensive household level dataset of electricity bills for California’s three investor-owned utilities (Pacific Gas and Electric, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison). The results suggest that the temperature response varies greatly across climate zones. Simulation results using a downscaled version of the National Center for Atmospheric Research global circulation model suggest that holding population constant, total consumption for the households considered may increase by up to 55% by the end of the century. The study further simulates the impacts of higher electricity prices and different scenarios of population growth. Finally, simulations were conducted consistent with higher adoption of cooling equipment in areas which are not yet saturated, as well as gains in efficiency due to aggressive energy efficiency policies.


Climate change Adaptation Impacts estimation Electricity consumption 


  1. Aroonruengsawat A, Auffhammer M (2009) Impacts of climate change on residential electricity consumption: evidence from billing data. California Energy Commission PIER Report CEC-500-2009-018-DGoogle Scholar
  2. Aroonruengsawat A, Auffhammer M (2011) Impacts of climate change on residential electricity consumption: evidence from billing data. In: Libecap G, Steckel RH (eds) The economics of climate change: past and present. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Auffhammer M, Kellogg R (2011) Clearing the air? The effects of gasoline content regulation on air quality. Am Econ Rev 101(6):2687–2722Google Scholar
  4. Baxter LW, Calandri K (1992) Global warming and electricity demand: a study of California. Energy Policy 20(3):233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2008) Regional economic accounts. Washington, DC.
  6. California Energy Commission (2005) Integrated energy policy report. Sacramento, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  7. Cayan D, Tyree M, Dettinger M, Hidalgo H, Das T, Maurer E, Bromirski P, Graham N, Flick R (2009) Climate change scenarios and sea level rise estimates for the California 2009 climate change scenarios assessment. California Energy Commission PIER Report CEC-500-2009-014-FGoogle Scholar
  8. Cline WR (1992) The economics of global warming. Institute for International Economics, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  9. Crowley C, Joutz F (2003) Hourly electricity loads: temperature elasticities and climate change. In: 23rd US Association of Energy Economics North American conferenceGoogle Scholar
  10. Deschênes O, Greenstone M (2011) Climate change, mortality, and adaptation: evidence from annual fluctuations in weather in the US. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3(4): 152-185Google Scholar
  11. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2008) State energy data system. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Espey JA, Espey M (2004) Turning on the lights: a meta-analysis of residential electricity demand elasticities. J Agric Appl Econ 36(1):65–81Google Scholar
  13. Fisher FM, Kaysen C (1962) A study in econometrics: the demand for electricity in the US. North Holland Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
  14. Franco G, Sanstad A (2008) Climate change and electricity demand in California. Clim Change 87:139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanemann W (1984) Discrete/continuous models of consumer demand. Econometrica 52:541–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Houthakker HS, Taylor LD (1970) Consumer demand in the United States: analyses and projections. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2000) Emissions scenarios. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Mansur E, Mendelsohn R, Morrison W (2008) Climate change adaptation: a study of fuel choice and consumption in the US energy sector. J Environ Econ Manage 55(2):175–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Reiss PC, White WM (2005) Household electricity demand revisited. Rev Econ Stud 72:853–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenthal D, Gruenspecht H, Moran E (1995) Effects of global warming on energy use for space heating and cooling in the United States. Energy J 16:77–96Google Scholar
  21. Sanstad AH, Johnson H, Goldstein N, Franco G (2009) Long-run socioeconomic and demographic scenarios for California. Prepared for the Public Interest Energy Research Program, California Energy Commission, CEC-500-2009-013-FGoogle Scholar
  22. Schlenker W, Roberts M (2009) Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to US crop yields under climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci US Am 106(37):15594–15598CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UC Berkeley ARE/IASBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of EconomicsThammasat UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations