Cost estimates for multiple pollutants: A maximum entropy approach

Energy Economics

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 503-519

  Rezek, Jon P ^a   Campbell, Randall C ^a  

^a MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Abatement costs; Electricity; Generalized maximum entropy; Linear inequality restrictions; Output distance function

Indexed keywords

EFFLUENTS; ELECTRIC POWER PLANTS; ESTIMATION; FORECASTING;

COST HOMOGENEITY; GENERALIZED MAXIMUM ENTROPY; LINEAR INEQUALITY RESTRICTIONS; OUTPUT DISTANCE FUNCTION; SHADOW PRICES;

COST REDUCTION;

ABATEMENT COST; EFFLUENT; EMISSION; ESTIMATION METHOD; MODELING; POWER PLANT; PRICE DETERMINATION;

EID: 33947120613     PISSN: 01409883     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2006.01.005     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aigner D.J., and Chu S.F. On estimating the industry production function. American Economic Review 13 (1968) 826-839
2. Aigner D.J., Lovell C.A.K., and Schmidt P. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. Journal of Econometrics 6 1 (1977, July) 21-37
3. Atkinson S.E., and Dorfman J.H. Bayesian measurement of productivity and efficiency in the presence of undesirable outputs: crediting electric utilities for reducing air pollution. Journal of Econometrics 126 (2005) 445-468
4. Brown T., O'Dowd W., Ruether R., and Smith D. Control of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants: a preliminary cost assessment. Advanced Coal-Based Power and Environmental Systems '98 Conference, Morgantown, West Virginia (1998), U.S. Department of Energy: Washington, D.C. Abstract 3B.6
5. X emissions from electricity generation. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 51 (2001, October) 1476-1489
6. 2 allowances. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30 1 (1996, January) 58-72
7. Coelli, T., 2002. "On the Econometric Estimation of the Distance Function Representation of a Production Technology", Working Paper, Université Catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Economics, May 2002.
8. Coequyt J., and Wiles R. Mercury Falling: An Analysis of Mercury Pollution from Coal-Burning Power Plants. November, 1999. Washington, D.C. (1999)
9. Dales J. Pollution, Property and Prices (1968), University Press of Toronto, Toronto
10. Ellerman A.D., Joskow P.L., Schmalensee R., Montero J., and Bailey E.M. Markets for Clean Air: The U.S. Acid Rain Program (2000), Cambridge University Press, New York
11. Färe R., and Primont D. A distance Function approach to multioutput technologies. Southern Economic Journal 56 (1990) 879-891
12. Färe R., and Grosskopf S. Shadow pricing of good and bad commodities. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80 3 (1998, August) 584-590
13. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Lovell C.A.K., and Yaisawarng S. Derivation of shadow prices for undesirable outputs: a distance function approach. Review of Economics and Statistics 75 2 (1993, May) 374-380
14. Farrell M.J. The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 120 A (1957) 253-281
15. Fischer C., and Morgenstern R.D. Carbon abatement costs: why the wide range of estimates. Resources for the Future (2003, September) Discussion Paper 03-42
16. Fraser I. An application of maximum entropy estimation: the demand for meat in the United Kingdom. Applied Economics 32 1 (2000, January) 45-59
17. Golan A., Judge G., and Miller D. Maximum Entropy Econometrics: Robust Estimation with Limited Data (1996), John Wiley and Sons, New York
18. Greene W.H. Maximum likelihood estimation of econometric frontier functions. Journal of Econometrics 13 (1980) 27-56
19. Hailu A., and Veeman T.S. Environmentally sensitive productivity analysis of the Canadian pulp and paper industry, 1959-1994: an input distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 40 3 (2000) 251-274
20. Hetemaki L. The impact of pollution control on technology and efficiency: a stochastic distance function approach. In: Boero G., and Silberston A. (Eds). Environmental Economics: Proceedings of a Conference Held by the Confederation of European Economic Associations at Oxford, 1993 (1995), St. Martin's Press, New York 196-230
21. X control in the eastern United States Discussion Paper 00-18. Resources for the Future (2000, April)
22. Kwon O.S., and Yun W.-C. Estimation of the marginal abatement costs of airborne pollutants in Korea's power generation sector. Energy Economics 21 6 (1999, December) 547-560
23. Mooney, and Duval B. A nonparametric approach to statistical inference. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 07-095 (1993), Sage, Newbury Park, CA
24. Montgomery D.W. Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs. Journal of Economic Theory 5 (1972) 395-418
25. Newell R.G., and Stavins R.N. Cost heterogeneity and the potential savings from market-based policies. Journal of Regulatory Economics 23 1 (2003, January) 43-59
26. Rezek J.P., and Perrin R.K. Environmentally-adjusted productivity in the Great Plains. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29 2 (2004, August) 346-369
27. Shen E.Z., and Perloff J.M. Maximum entropy and Bayesian approaches to the ratio problem. Journal of Econometrics 104 2 (2001, September) 289-313
28. Shephard R.W. Theory of Cost and Production Functions (1970), Princeton University Press, Princeton
29. 2 emissions?. Energy Journal 19 4 (1998) 63-83
30. Swinton J.R. The potential for cost savings in the sulfur dioxide allowance market: empirical evidence from Florida. Land Economics 78 3 (2002, August) 390-404
31. Tietenberg T.H. Emission Trading: An Exercise in Reforming Pollution Policy (1985), Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
32. Turner, J., 1994. Measuring the cost of pollution abatement in the electric utility industry: a production function approach. PhD dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
33. United States Cong. Senate, 108th Congress, 1st Session, S. 843, 2004. Clean Air Planning Act of 2003 [introduced in the U.S. Senate; 9 April 2003] 108th Congress. Congressional Bills, GPO Access. 27 December 2004 http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:s843is.txt.
34. United States Cong. Senate, 109th Congress, 1st session, S. 131, 2005. Clear Skies Act of 2005 [introduced in the U.S. Senate; 24 January 2005] 109th Congress. Congressional Bills, GPO Access. 21 December 2005 http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s131is.txt.
35. United States Cong. Senate, 109th Congress, 1st session, S. 150, 2005. Clean Power Act of 2005 [introduced in the U.S. Senate; 25 January 2005] 109th Congress. Congressional Bills, GPO Acess. 21 December 2005 http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s150is.txt.
36. United States Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1998a, FORM EIA-759, Monthly power plant report.
37. United States Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1998b, FORM EIA-826, Monthly electric utility database.
38. United States Energy Information Administration, 2001. Reducing Emissions of Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Mercury from Electric Power Plants. SR/OIAF/2001-04. September, 2001. Washington, D.C.
39. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1997. Mercury Study Report to Congress. EPA-452/R-97-003. December, 1997. Washington, D.C.
40. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Supplemental Ozone Transport Rulemaking Regulatory Analysis. Office of Air and Radiation, April 1998.
41. United States Environmental Protection Agency. National Air Pollution Emission Trends: 1900-1998. EPA-454/R-00-002. March, 2000a. Washington, D.C.
42. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Acid Rain Program 2002 Progress Report. EPA-430/R-03-011. Fall, 2000b. Washington, D.C.
43. United States Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 1998, FERC form no. 1: Annual report of major electric utilities, licensees and others.