Browsing by Author "Newell, R"

Now showing 1 - 16 of 16

Open Access
A U.S. Innovation Strategy for Climate Change Mitigation
(2008-12) Newell, R
Open Access
Climate Technology Deployment Policy
(Assessing U.S. Climate Policy Options: A Report Summarizing Work at RFF as Part of the Inter-Industry U.S. Climate Policy Forum, 2007) Newell, R
Open Access
Climate Technology Research, Development, and Demonstration: Funding Sources, Institutions, and Instruments
(Assessing U.S. Climate Policy Options: A Report Summarizing Work at RFF as Part of the Inter-Industry U.S. Climate Policy Forum, 2007) Newell, R
Open Access
Discounting the Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation: How Much Do Uncertain Rates Increase Valuations?
(2001-12) Newell, R; Pizer, William
Open Access
Discounting the Benefits of Climate Change Policies Using Uncertain Rates
(Resources, 2002-01-01) Newell, R; Pizer, W
Evaluating environmental policies, such as the mitigation of greenhouse gases, frequently requires balancing near-term mitigation costs against long-term environmental benefits. Conventional approaches to valuing such investments hold interest rates constant, but the authors contend that there is a real degree of uncertainty in future interest rates. This leads to a higher valuation of future benefits relative to conventional methods that ignore interest rate uncertainty.
Open Access
Energy efficiency policies: A retrospective examination
(Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 2006-11-20) Gillingham, K; Newell, R; Palmer, K
We review literature on several types of energy efficiency policies: appliance standards, financial incentive programs, information and voluntary programs, and management of government energy use. For each, we provide a brief synopsis of the relevant programs, along with available existing estimates of energy savings, costs, and cost-effectiveness at a national level. The literature examining these estimates points to potential issues in determining the energy savings and costs, but recent evidence suggests that techniques for measuring both have improved. Taken together, the literature identifies up to four quads of energy savings annually from these programs - at least half of which is attributable to appliance standards and utility-based demand-side management, with possible additional energy savings from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) ENERGY STAR, Climate Challenge, and Section 1605b voluntary programs to reduce carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions. Related reductions in CO 2 and criteria air pollutants may contribute an additional 10% to the value of energy savings above the price of energy itself. Copyright © 2006 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved.
Open Access
Environmental economics. Determining benefits and costs for future generations.
(Science, 2013-07-26) Arrow, K; Cropper, M; Gollier, C; Groom, B; Heal, G; Newell, R; Nordhaus, W; Pindyck, R; Pizer, W; Portney, P; Sterner, T; Tol, RSJ; Weitzman, M
Open Access
Intellectual Property and Alternatives: Strategies for Green Innovation
(2008-12) Reichman, Jerome; Rai, Arti K.; Newell, R; Wiener, Jonathan B.
Open Access
Introduction and Summary
(Accelerating Energy Innovation: Insights from Multiple Sectors, 2011-05-30) Henderson, Rebecca M.; Newell, R
Open Access
Modeling economy-wide vs sectoral climate policies using combined aggregate-sectoral models
(Energy Journal, 2006-07-25) Pizer, W; Burtraw, D; Harrington, W; Newell, R; Sanchirico, J
Economic analyses of climate change policies frequently focus on reductions of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions via market-based, economy-wide policies. The current course of environment and energy policy debate in the United States, however, suggests an alternative outcome: sector-based and/or inefficiently designed policies. This paper uses a collection of specialized, sector-based models in conjunction with a computable general equilibrium model of the economy to examine and compare these policies at an aggregate level. We examine the relative cost of different policies designed to achieve the same quantity of emission reductions. We find that excluding a limited number of sectors from an economy-wide policy does not significantly raise costs. Focusing policy solely on the electricity and transportation sectors doubles costs, however, and using non-market policies can raise cost by a factor of ten. These results are driven in part by, and are sensitive to, our modeling of pre-existing tax distortions. Copyright © 2006 by the IAEE. All rights reserved.
Open Access
The Energy Innovation System: A Historical Perspective
(Accelerating energy innovation: insights from multiple sectors, 2011-01-01) Newell, R
Accelerating energy innovation could be an important part of an effective response to the threat of climate change. Written by a stellar group of experts in the field, this book complements existing research on the subject with an exploration of the role that public and private policy have played in enabling--and sustaining--swift innovation in a variety of industries, from agriculture and the life sciences to information technology. Chapters highlight the factors that have determined the impact of past policies, and suggest that effectively managed federal funding, strategies to increase customer demand, and the enabling of aggressive competition from new firms are important ingredients for policies that affect innovative activity.
Open Access
The Market-Based Lead Phasedown
(Moving to Markets in Environmental Regulation: Lessons from Twenty Years of Experience, 2006-10-01) Newell, R; Rogers, K
© 2007 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.This essay uses the case study of the phasedown of lead gasoline in the United States to argue that market-based instruments can be effective in meeting environmental objectives at a lower cost than uniform standards, and can do so more quickly where permit banking is allowed. The performance of the lead phasedown program is assessed along several dimensions, including its overall effectiveness, static and dynamic efficiency, revelation of costs, and distributional effects. It is argued that the program likely saved hundreds of millions of dollars over policies that would not have allowed trading and banking, and also provided incentives for the development of new technology.
Open Access
U.S. Climate Mitigation in the Context of Global Stabilization
(Assessing U.S. Climate Policy Options: A Report Summarizing Work at RFF as Part of the Inter-Industry U.S. Climate Policy Forum, 2008) Newell, R
Open Access
What's the big deal about oil? How we can get oil policy right
(Current, 2007-07-01) Newell, R
Open Access
What’s the Best way to Promote Green Power?: Don’t Forget the Emissions Price
(Resources, 2008) Fischer, Carolyn; Newell, R
Open Access
Where does energy R&D come from? Examining crowding out from energy R&D
(Energy Economics, 2012-07-01) Popp, D; Newell, R
Recent efforts to endogenize technological change in climate policy models demonstrate the importance of accounting for the opportunity cost of climate R&D investments. Because the social returns to R&D investments are typically higher than the social returns to other types of investment, any new climate mitigation R&D that comes at the expense of other R&D investment may dampen the overall gains from induced technological change. Unfortunately, there has been little empirical work to guide modelers as to the potential magnitude of such crowding out effects. This paper considers both the private and social opportunity costs of climate R&D. Addressing private costs, we ask whether an increase in climate R&D represents new R&D spending, or whether some (or all) of the additional climate R&D comes at the expense of other R&D. Addressing social costs, we use patent citations to compare the social value of alternative energy research to other types of R&D that may be crowded out. Beginning at the industry level, we find no evidence of crowding out across sectors-that is, increases in energy R&D do not draw R&D resources away from sectors that do not perform R&D. Given this, we proceed with a detailed look at alternative energy R&D. Linking patent data and financial data by firm, we ask whether an increase in alternative energy patents leads to a decrease in other types of patenting activity. While we find that increases in alternative energy patents do result in fewer patents of other types, the evidence suggests that this is due to profit-maximizing changes in research effort, rather than financial constraints that limit the total amount of R&D possible. Finally, we use patent citation data to compare the social value of alternative energy patents to other patents by these firms. Alternative energy patents are cited more frequently, and by a wider range of other technologies, than other patents by these firms, suggesting that their social value is higher. © 2011 Elsevier B.V.