Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Energy Demand in Industry pp 151–170Cite as

Energy Demand Model II

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 654 Accesses

Part of the book series: Green Energy and Technology ((GREEN))

Abstract

In this chapter the third group of the econometric model is estimated, namely the energy demand model accounting for risk. The model is constructed as in the previous models in two forms: The Cobb-Douglas and the Translog function to allow for consistency and comparability. The Just and Pop production risk function is applied. To estimate the energy demand incorporating risk, different input factors of production are included.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Since the model is non-linear in parameters an iterative procedure is used. Convergence will be obtained after repeated iteration process, which is equivalent of using the maximum likelihood estimation method.

References

  • Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979). A simple test for heteroscedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica, 47(5), 1287. doi:10.2307/1911963.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bunse, K., Vodicka, M., Schönsleben, P., Brülhart, M., & Ernst, F. O. (2011). Integrating energy efficiency performance in production management—gap analysis between industrial needs and scientific literature. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(6–7), 667–679. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.11.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallant, A. R. (2008). Nonlinear statistical models. New York: John.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2008). Econometric analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, A. C. (1976). Estimating regression-models with multiplicative heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 44(3), 461–465. doi:10.2307/1913974.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Heshmati, A. (2001). Labour demand and efficiency in Swedish savings banks. Applied Financial Economics, 11(4), 423–433. doi:10.1080/096031001300313983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Just, R. E., & Pope, R. D. (1978). Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications. Journal of Econometrics, 7(1), 67–86. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(78)90006-4.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kumbhakar, S. C., & Tveterås, R. (2003). Risk preferences, production risk and firm heterogeneity. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 105(2), 275–293. doi:10.1111/1467-9442.t01-1-00009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovell, C. A. K., & Schmidt, P. (1987). A comparison of alternative approaches to the measurement of productive efficiency. In A. Dogramaci & R. Färe (Eds.), Applications of modern production theory: efficiency and productivity (Vol. 9, pp. 3–32). Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, C. B., Erickson, K. W., Ball, V. E., & Mishra, A. K. (2003). A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture: A Dynamic Specification. http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:aaea03:22027.

  • Saha, A., Havenner, A., & Talpaz, H. (1997). Stochastic production function estimation: Small sample properties of ML versus FGLS. Applied Economics, 29(4), 459–469. doi:10.1080/000368497326958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. (1993). SAS/ETS User’s Guide, Version 6, (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tveterås, R. (1997). Econometric Modelling of Production Technology Under Risk: The Case of Norwegian Salmon Aquaculture Industry. (PhD Dissertation), Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Bergen, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tveterås, R. (1999). Production risk and productivity growth: Some findings for Norwegian Salmon aquaculture. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12(2 SRC—GoogleScholar), 161–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tveterås, R. (2000). Flexible panel data models for risky production technologies with an application to Salomon aquaculture. Journal of Econometric Reviews, 19(3 SRC—GoogleScholar), 367–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. (1980). A Heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817. doi:10.2307/1912934.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program, College of Engineering, Seoul National University, San 56-1, Shillim-Dong, Kwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-742, South Korea

    Nabaz T. Khayyat

Authors
  1. Nabaz T. Khayyat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nabaz T. Khayyat .

Appendix A: Summary Data, Parameter Estimates, and Elasticities for the Translog Energy Demand Model II

Appendix A: Summary Data, Parameter Estimates, and Elasticities for the Translog Energy Demand Model II

Table 9.7 Summary statistics for the risk variables
Full size table
Table 9.8 Pearson correlation coefficients
Full size table
Table 9.9 Analysis of variance—feasible generalized least square parameter estimates
Full size table
Table 9.10 Overall mean elasticities by industrial sector
Full size table
Table 9.11 Mean energy demand elasticities by year
Full size table
Table 9.12 Mean elasticities by industries’ characteristics: technology level
Full size table
Table 9.13 Mean elasticities by industries’ characteristics: import/export orientation
Full size table
Table 9.14 Mean elasticities by industries’ characteristics: R&D level
Full size table
Table 9.15 Mean elasticities by industries’ characteristics: industry size
Full size table
Table 9.16 Mean elasticities by industries’ characteristics: oil shocks
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Khayyat, N.T. (2015). Energy Demand Model II. In: Energy Demand in Industry. Green Energy and Technology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9953-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9953-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9952-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9953-9

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation