Energy Efficiency

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 1–22

Evaluating the risks of alternative energy policies: a case study of industrial energy efficiency

  • Marilyn A. Brown
  • Paul Baer
  • Matt Cox
  • Yeong Jae Kim
Original Article


Numerous studies have shown the potential for US manufacturing to cut its energy costs by installing more efficient equipment that offers competitive payback periods, but the realization of this potential is hindered by numerous obstacles. This paper evaluates seven federal policy options aimed at revitalizing US manufacturing by improving its energy economics while also achieving environmental and energy reliability goals. Traditionally, policy analysts have examined the cost-effectiveness of energy policies using deterministic assumptions. When risk factors are introduced, they are typically examined using sensitivity analysis to focus on alternative assumptions about budgets, policy design, energy prices, and other such variables. In this paper, we also explicitly model the stochastic nature of several key risk factors including future energy prices, damages from climate change, and the cost of criteria pollutants. Using these two approaches, each policy is "stress tested" to evaluate the likely range of private and social returns on investment. Overall, we conclude that the societal cost-effectiveness of policies is generally more sensitive to alternative assumptions about damages from criteria pollutants and climate change compared with energy prices; however, risks also vary across policies based partly on the technologies they target. Future research needs to examine the macroeconomic consequences of the choice between a lethargic approach to energy waste and modernization in manufacturing versus a vigorous commitment to industrial energy productivity and innovation as characterized by the suite of policies described in this paper.


Industrial energy efficiency Energy policy Risk analysis Monte Carlo simulation 


  1. Ackerman, F., & Heinzerling, L. (2003). Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bernhardt, E. S., & Palmer, M. A. (2011). The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1223, 39–57. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.05986.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, M.A., Chandler, J., Lapsa, M.V., Ally, M. (2011a). Adding a behavioral dimension to residential construction and retrofit policies. In K. E. Martinez, S. Laitner (eds.), Energy smart behaviors, people centered policies, and public engagement.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, M. A., Cortes, R., & Cox, M. (2010). Reinventing industrial energy use in a resource-constrained world. In F. Sioshansi (Ed.), Smart living in the coming age of scarcity. Maryland Heights: Elsevier Press. Chapter 8.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, M. A., Jackson, R., Cox, M., Cortes, R., Deitchman, B., Lapsa, M. V. (2011b). Making industry part of the climate solution: Policy options to promote energy efficiency. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL/TM-2010/78, May.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, M. A., & Sovacool, B. K. (2011). Climate change and global energy: Technology and policy options. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration (CCCSTI) (2009). Strategies for the commercialization and deployment of greenhouse gas intensity-reducing technologies and practices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/PI-0007.Google Scholar
  8. Cox, M., Brown, M. A., Jackson, R. (2011). Regulatory reform to promote clean energy: The potential of output-based emissions standards. 2011 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry.Google Scholar
  9. Cullenward, D., Schipper, L., Sudarshan, A., & Howarth, R. B. (2011). Psychohistory revisited: Fundamental issues in forecasting climate futures. Climatic Change, 104(3–4), 457–472. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9995-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dergiades, T., & Tsoulfidis, L. (2008). Estimating residential demand for electricity in the United States. Energy Economics, 30(5), 2722–2730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Department of Energy, Industrial Technologies Program (DOE/ITP) (2010). MotorMaster+. Olympia, WA: Washington State University Energy Extension Program.Google Scholar
  12. Dunn, W. N. (2011). Public policy analysis: An introduction, fifth edition. Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2010). Annual energy outlook 2010. Retrieved from
  14. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2011a). Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard, as requested by Chairman Bingaman. Retrieved from
  15. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2011b). Annual energy outlook 2011. Retrieved from
  16. Environment and Development Division (2001). Energy efficiency—promotion of energy efficiency in industry and financing of investments. United Nations. Retrieved from
  17. Ericsson, K. (2006). Evaluation of the Danish voluntary agreements on energy efficiency in trade and industry. Retrieved from
  18. Espey, J., & Espey, M. (2004). Turning on the lights: A meta-analysis of residential electricity demand elasticities. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 36(1), 65–81.Google Scholar
  19. European Association for the Promotion of Cogeneration (2001). A guide to cogeneration. Belgium. Retrieved from
  20. Fleiter, T., Gruber, E., Eichhammer, W., & Worrell, E. (2012). The German energy audit program for firms—A cost-effective way to improve energy efficiency? Energy Efficiency. doi:10.1007/s12053-012-9157-7.
  21. Freedman, B. S., & Watson, S. (2003). Output-based emission standards: Advancing innovative energy technologies. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  22. Fuller, M. (2010). PACE financing programs: Enabling investments in clean energy. Retrieved on May 30, 2012.
  23. Granade, H., Choi, J., Creyts, A., Derkach, P., Farese, S. N., Ostrowski, K. (2009). Unlocking energy efficiency in the U.S. Economy. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from
  24. Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) (2010). Database. Retrieved from on January 19, 2010.
  25. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2011). Are we entering a golden age of gas? World energy outlook special report.Google Scholar
  26. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2012). Energy management programmes for industry. Retrieved from January 20, 2012.
  27. Jackson, R. K., Brown, M. A., Cox, M. (2011). Policy analysis of incentives to encourage adoption of the superior energy performance program. 2011 ACEEE summer study on energy efficiency in industry. Retrieved from
  28. Ministry of Climate and Energy (2012). The Danish voluntary agreement scheme. Retrieved from January 20, 2012.
  29. Muller, N. Z. (2011). Linking policy to statistical uncertainty in air pollution damages. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 11(1).Google Scholar
  30. National Research Council. (2009). Hidden costs of energy: Unpriced consequences of energy production and use. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  31. Nadel, S., Elliott, R. N., Shephard, M., Greenberg, S., Katz, G., & de Almeida, A. T. (2002). Energy-efficient motor systems: A handbook on technology, program and policy opportunities (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.Google Scholar
  32. National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) (2012). Energy efficiency coalition for industry. Retrieved from
  33. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (2002). Guidelines and discount rates for benefit–cost analysis of federal programs. Retrieved from
  34. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (2009). 2010 discount rates for OMB Circular No. A-94. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from
  35. Owen, D. (2010). The Efficiency Dilemma. The New Yorker, 78–85.Google Scholar
  36. Pond, G. J., Passmore, M. E., Borsuk, F., Reynolds, L., & Rose, C. J. (2008). Downstream effects of mountaintop coal mining: Comparing biological conditions using family- and genus-level macroinvertebrate bioassessment tools. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 27(3), 717–737. doi:10.1899/08-015.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Prindle, B. (2010). From shop floor to top floor: Best business practices in energy efficiency. Washington, DC: Pew Center on Global Climate Change.Google Scholar
  38. Productivity Commission (2011). Carbon emission policies in key economies, research report. Canberra.Google Scholar
  39. Richardson, J. W. (2008). Simulation for applied risk management with an introduction to SIMETAR. Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University.Google Scholar
  40. Sagoff, M. (1988). The economy of the Earth: Philosophy, law and the environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Sovacool, B. K. (2008). The dirty energy dilemma: What’s blocking clean power in the United States. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Thiruchelvam, M., & Kumar, S. (2003). Policy options to promote energy efficient and environmentally sound technologies in small- and medium-scale industries. Energy Policy, 31(10), 977–987. doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00140-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tol, R. S. J. (2005). The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: An assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy, 33(16), 2064–2074. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.04.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change (UKDECC) (2012). The green deal. Retrieved on May 30, 2012.
  45. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2004). Output-based regulations: A handbook for air regulators. Retrieved from
  46. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2007). Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990–2001. Annex B. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA. Retrieved from
  47. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2009). Energy portfolio standards and the promotion of combined heat and power, April. Retrieved from
  48. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2010). Technical support document: Social cost of carbon for regulatory impact analysis under Executive Order 12866. Retrieved from
  49. Vithayasrichareon, P., & MacGill, I. F. (2012). A Monte Carlo based decision-support tool for assessing generation portfolios in future carbon constrained electricity industries. Energy Policy, 41, 374-392. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.10.060.
  50. Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. (2011). Policy analysis: Concepts and practice, fifth edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  51. Weitzman, M. (2009). On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(February), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Worrell, E., Laitner, J. A., Ruth, M., & Finman, H. (2003). Productivity benefits of industrial energy efficiency measures. Energy, 28(11), 1081–1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wright, A., Martin, M., Nimbalkar,S., Quinn, J., Glatt, S., Orthwein, B. (2010). Results from the DOE 2008 save energy now assessment initiative. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL/TM-2010/145. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marilyn A. Brown
    • 1
  • Paul Baer
    • 1
  • Matt Cox
    • 1
  • Yeong Jae Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public PolicyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations