The demand for ethanol as a gasoline substitute

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 63, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 151-168

  Anderson, Soren T ^a,b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative fuels; Biofuels; Ethanol demand; Gasoline demand

Indexed keywords

DEMAND CURVES; FUELING STATION; GASOLINE DEMAND; INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES; THEORETICAL MODELS; UNDERLYING DISTRIBUTION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ALTERNATIVE FUELS; BIOFUELS; GASOLINE;

ETHANOL;

ALTERNATIVE FUEL; BIOFUEL; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ETHANOL; HETEROGENEITY; HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; MITIGATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL STUDY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84857030779     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2011.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Holland S.P., Knittel C.R., Hughes J.E. Greenhouse gas reductions under low carbon fuel standards?. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 2008, 1(1):106-146.
2. Goodwin P., Dargay J., Hanly M. Elasticities of road traffic and fuel consumption with respect to price and income: a review. Transport Reviews 2004, 24(3):275-292.
3. Graham D.J., Glaister S. The demand for automobile fuel: a survey of elasticities. Journal of Transportation Economics and Policy 2002, 36(1):1-26.
4. Greening L.A., Greene D.L., Difiglio C. Energy efficiency and consumption-the rebound effect-a survey. Energy Policy 2000, 28:389-401.
5. Espey M. Gasoline demand revisited: an international meta-analysis of elasticities. Energy Economics 1998, 20(3):273-295.
6. Espey M. Explaining the variation in elasticity estimates of gasoline demand in the United States: a meta-analysis. Energy Journal 1996, 17(3):49-60.
7. Goodwin P.B. A review of new demand elasticities with special reference to short and long run effects of price changes. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 1992, 26(2):155-169.
8. Dahl C., Sterner T. Analyzing gasoline demand elasticities: a survey. Energy Economics 1991, 13(3):203-210.
9. Small K.A., Van Dender K. Fuel efficiency and motor vehicle travel: the declining rebound effect. Energy Journal 2007, 28(1):25-51.
10. Hughes J.E., Knittel C.R., Sperling D. Evidence of a shift in the short-run price elasticity of gasoline demand. The Energy Journal 2008, 29(1).
11. A. Salvo, H. Christian, Consumer Choice Between Gasoline and Sugarcane Ethanol, Working Paper, February 2011.
12. Rask K.N. Clean air and renewable fuels: the market for fuel ethanol in the U.S. from 1984-1993. Energy Economics 1998, 20(3):325-345.
13. Alves D.C.O., De Losso da Silveira Bueno R. Short-run, long-run and cross elasticities of gasoline demand in Brazil. Energy Economics 2003, 25(2):191-199.
14. M. Perkins, S. Barros, Brazil Sugar Ethanol Update, Global Agriculture Information Network Report BR6001, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, February 2006.
15. Salvo A., Huse C. Is arbitrage tying the price of ethanol to that of gasoline? Evidence from the uptake of flexible-fuel technology. Energy Journal 2011, 32(3):119-148.
16. Greene D.L. Motor fuel choice: an econometric analysis. Transportation Research A 1989, 23A(3):243-253.
17. Phillips O.R., Schutte D.P. Identifying profitable self-service markets: a test in gasoline retailing. Applied Economics 1988, 20(2):263-272.
18. Anderson S.T., Sallee J.M. Using loopholes to reveal the marginal cost of regulation: the case of fuel-economy standards. American Economic Review 2011, 101(4):1375-1409.
19. Farrell A.E., Plevin R.J., Turner B.T., Jones A.D., O'Hare M., Kammen D.M. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 2006, 311(5760):506-508.
20. I. Harris,Two-Thirds of Adult Vehicle Owners are Familiar with Flexible Fuel Vehicles and More than Half are Interested in Purchasing One, July 26 2006. 〈〉. http://www.harrisinteractive.com/NEWS/allnewsbydate.aspNewsID1074.
21. Phoenix Automotive, E85 ethanol flexible-fuel vehicle survey, Prepared for the American Lung Association of Minnesota, May 2006.
22. Corts K.S. Building out alternative fuel retail infrastructure: government fleet spillovers in E85. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2010, 59(3):219-234.
23. Wooldridge J.M. Selection corrections for panel data models under conditional mean independence assumptions. Journal of Econometrics 1995, 68:115-132.
24. Wooldridge J.M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data 2002, MIT Press.
25. Kennan J. Simultaneous equations bias in disaggregated econometric models. The Review of Economic Studies 1989, 56(1):151-156.
26. Wooldridge J.M. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 2009, Cengage Learning. 4th ed.
27. Angrist J.D., Graddy K., Imbens G.W. The interpretation of instrumental variables estimators in simultaneous models with an application to the demand for fish. Review of Economic Studies 2000, 67(23):499-527.
28. Hausman J. Mismeasured variables in econometric analysis: problems from the right and problems from the left. Journal of Economic Perspectives Autumn 2001, 15(4):57-67.
29. Greene D.L. Survey evidence on the importance of fuel availability to choice of alternative fuels and vehicles. Energy Studies Review 1998, 8(3).
30. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2011, April 2011.
31. Khanna M., Chen X., Huang H., Önal H. Supply of cellulosic biofuel feedstocks and regional production pattern. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2011, 93(2):473-480.
32. R. Wallace, K. Ibsen, A. McAloon, W. Yee, Feasibility study for co-locating and integrating ethanol production plants from corn starch and lignocellulosic feedstocks, U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Energy, 2005.
33. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis, February 2010.
34. Searcy E., Flynn P., Ghafoori E., Kumar A. The relative cost of biomass energy transport. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 2007, 137-140(1-12):639-652.
35. Hughes J.E The higher price of cleaner fuels: market power in the rail transport of fuel ethanol. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2011, 62(2):123-139.
36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Facts, February 2005.
37. Harrington W., Parry I., Walls M. Automobile externalities and policies. Journal of Economic Literature 2007, 45:374-400.
38. Tol R.S.J. The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: a assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy 2005, 33(16):622-634. 2064-2074.
39. Stern N. Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change 2006, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
40. Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R.A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., Yu T.-H. Use of U.S. Croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 2008, 319(5867):1238-1240.
41. Fargione J., Hill J., Tilman D., Polasky S., Hawthorne P. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 2008, 319(5867):1235-1238.