Bridging the Energy Efficiency Gap: A Field Experiment on Lifetime Energy Costs and Household Appliances
Providing consumers with information that can lead to more energy-efficient choices can help reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions while reducing costs to consumers. A natural field experiment is conducted in collaboration with an electrical retailer to test strategies for influencing sales of household appliances. The experiment involves two product categories, fridge-freezers and tumble driers. Information on lifetime energy cost of appliances is provided through a label and training of sales staff. For fridge-freezers, the authors find no significant effects. For tumble driers, the combined treatment and training treatment reduce average energy use of tumble driers sold by 4.9% and 3.4%, respectively. The effect is strongest initially, over 12% on average for the first 3 months for the combined treatment but declines over time. The effect is significant at the 5% level for the combined treatment while not significant for sales staff training.
KeywordsEnergy efficiency Field experiment Cost disclosure Household appliances
Thanks to Mikkel Alme, Martine Grønlund and Åshild Indresøvde at Elkjøp for significant help with designing and implementing the experiment. Thanks to Christian Bjørnæs, Torben Mideksa, Bård Romstad, and Hege Westskog at CICERO for help with conducting the experiment and analysing the results. The project was funded by GreeNudge. Special thanks to Beate Nossum and Gunhild A. Stordalen at GreeNudge for help with making the experiment possible.
- Allcott, H., & Wozny, N. (2010). Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox. Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research. MIT Energy Initiative and Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
- Allcott, H., Mullainathan, S., & Taubinsky, D. (2011). Externalizing the internality. New York University Working Paper.Google Scholar
- Cropper, M. L., & Oates, W. E. (1992). Environmental economics: A survey. Journal of Economics Literature, 30(2), 675–740.Google Scholar
- European Council. (1992). Council directive 92/75/EEC of 22 September 1992. Official Journal of the European Communities 13.10.92: European Council.Google Scholar
- Growth from Knowledge. (2007) Forbrukerdagbøker [consumer diaries] 2007. Oslo.Google Scholar
- Korhonen, A., Roos, I., Throne-Holst, H., Jensen, H. M., Ahlkvist-Johansson, H., & Rosen, G. (2007). Impact of energy labelling on household appliances TemaNord (vol. 605): Nordic Council of Ministers.Google Scholar
- Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R., & Meyer, L. A. (2007). Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Shen, J., & Saijo, T. (2009). Does an energy efficiency label alter consumers’ purchasing decisions? A latent class approach based on a stated choice experiment in Shanghai. [research support, non-U.S. Gov’t]. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(11), 3561–3573. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stern, N. (2007): The economics of climate change - The Stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Thøgersen, J. (2007). Social marketing of alternative transportation modes. In T. Gärling & L. Steg (Eds.), Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life (pp. 367–381). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Thorne, J., & Egan, C. (2002). An evaluation of the federal trade commission’s energy guide appliance label: Final report and recommendations. Washington D.C: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.Google Scholar