A method for measuring the efficiency gap between average and best practice energy use: The ENERGY STAR industrial energy performance indicator

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 51-65

  Boyd, Gale A ^a,b  

^a ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b Chicago Census Research Data Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Energy efficiency; Energy intensity; Industrial ecology; Industrial energy use; Plant level; Stochastic frontier

Indexed keywords

ENERGY INTENSITY; INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY; INDUSTRIAL ENERGY USE; PLANT LEVEL; STOCHASTIC FRONTIER;

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; ENERGY UTILIZATION; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; RANDOM PROCESSES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS;

ENERGY EFFICIENCY; ENERGY USE; INDUSTRIAL PRACTICE; MEASUREMENT METHOD; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT;

EID: 24644497174     PISSN: 10881980     EISSN: 15309290     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/1088198054821609     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Boyd, G. A. and J. D. McClelland. 1999. The impact of environmental constraints on productivity improvement in integrated paper plants. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 38(2): 121-142.
2. Boyd, G., J. Molburg, and R. Prince. 1996. Alternative methods of marginal abatement cost estimation: Nonparametric distance functions. Paper presented at the 17th Annual North American Conference of the United States Association for Energy Economics and the International Association for Energy Economics, October 27-30, Boston.
3. 2 as an undesirable output. Boston: Eastern Economic Association.
4. Brannlund, R., R. Färe, and S. Grosskopf. 1995. Environmental regulation and profitability: An application to Swedish pulp and paper mills. Environmental and Resource Economics 6(1): 23-36.
5. Chung, Y. H., R. Färe, and S. Grosskopf. 1997. Productivity and undesirable outputs: A directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management 51(3): 229-240.
6. Corio, M. and G. Boyd. 1996. Applying the competitive business equation to power generation operations and economics. Paper presented at the EPRI Fossil Plant Heat Rate Improvement Conference, May, Dallas, TX.
7. Green, W. 1993. The econometric approach to efficiency analysis. In The measurement of productive efficiency: Techniques and applications, edited by H. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell, and S. Schmidt. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Greene, W. 1995. LIMDEP version 7.0 user manual. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software.
9. Greene, W. 2000. Simulated likelihood estimation of the normal-gamma stochastic frontier function. Working paper, New York University Economics Department, New York.
10. Jeon, B. M. and R. C. Sickles. 2001. The role of environmental factors in growth accounting: A non-parametric analysis. Paper presented at the 2001 North American Winter Meetings of the Econometric Society, 5-7 January, New Orleans, LA.
11. Nelson, K. 1994. Finding and implementing projects that reduce waste. In Industrial ecology and global change, edited by R. Socolow, C. Andrews, F. Berkhout, and V. Thomas. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Panayotou, T. and C. Zinnes. 1994. Free lunch economics for industrial ecologists. In Industrial ecology and global change, edited by R. Socolow, C. Andrews, F. Berkhout, and V. Thomas. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Porter, M. E. and C. v. d. Linde. 1995. Green and competitive. Harvard Business Review 73(5): 120-134.
14. Seiford, L. M. 1999. A cyber-bibliography for data envelopment analysis (1978-1999). In Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references, and DEA-solver software, edited by W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, and K. Tone. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
15. Tyteca, D. 1998. On sustainability indicators at the firm-level: Pollution and resource efficiency as a necessary condition toward sustainability. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2(4): 61-77.
16. Yaisawarng, S. and J. D. Klein. 1994. The effects of sulfur dioxide controls on productivity change in the U.S. electric power industry. Review of Economics and Statistics 76(3): 447-460.
17. 2 emissions from OECD industries. Resource and Energy Economics 23(1): 63-83.