| 摘要 | 1. Research Purpose
High oil price, climate change and pressures on sustainable development have led to a resurgence of energy efficiency. Recognizing the importance of energy efficiency, G8 summit, held in Gleneagles, UK, 2005, asked IEA to present a new strategy for energy efficiency at the next summit. Developed countries, such as US, Japan, and European countries, are modifying their energy strategies to reflect an important role of energy efficiency. These trends require Korean government to review and improve the overall energy strategies and the policies on energy efficiency.
This research aims at developing impact assessment methods of energy efficiency policies for market transformation. The methodological accuracy of impact assessment on policy tool is essential to increase the effectiveness of the energy efficiency policy. The domestically used methods, however, are simply based on technological characteristics embedded in efficiency policies. The methods do not reflect a role of market for energy efficient technologies. Considering that recent efficiency policies focus on encouraging market transformation, it is very timely to conduct research on assessment methods for efficiency policy tools.
2. Methodologies & Major Results
In this report, there are four sub-works. First, we classified various energy efficiency polices and select three policy programs that we think need in-depth analysis. We categorized about 60 policy programs into 5 groups, which are pricing, regulation and information, taxation, R&D, and voluntary agreement. Among many programs, we have chosen energy efficiency standard, corporate average fuel efficiency (CAFE), and voluntary agreement (VA) for in-depth analysis.
Second, we conducted benefit/cost analysis on the energy efficiency standard program from both consumer's and social perspectives. We considered 14 appliances sold in Korea 2005. The result showed that energy saving and greenhouse gas reduction of the program were about 396,000 TOE and 739,000 tCO2, respectively. The program generated net consumer benefit of 172.5 billion won and net social benefit of 207.2 billion won in 2005. This implies that energy efficiency standard program is a no regret policy. In this analysis, there is a limitation in the sense that we cannot distinguish net effect from gross effect of the program.
Third, we examined short term effects of CAFE introduced in 2006 in terms of energy saving and social welfare, using game theory, nested logit analysis and simulation. The data include prices and characteristics of 132 new passenger cars sold domestically in 2005. The results are as follows. The CAFE level that car manufacturers can comply with is at highest 10.6 ��/��. Energy saving was estimated to be about 3.7% at the cost of social welfare loss of 99.6 billion won. The CAFE regulation level of 10.6��/�� is justified when the unit social benefit of energy saving is not less than 1,267 won/��. If the unit social benefit is less than 676 won/��, the CAFE should not be introduced. Research on long term effects of the CAFE is one of future studies.
Lastly, we estimated the effects of VA using simulation techniques. Profit maximization condition and investment data of 46 VA participant companies mainly constitute to the simulation model. We showed that the energy saving is about 3-5% under the condition that VA does not affect production quantities. If VA affects production quantities, the energy saving is estimated to be 10-11%.
3. Conclusions & Policy Implications
The primary contribution of this research is to improve effectiveness of planning and monitoring on energy efficiency policies. A similar approach can be applied to other efficiency policy programs. This study also suggests specific policy implications for the programs as follows. First, energy efficiency standard is a no regret policy and needs continuous implementation and improvement. Second, even though the analysis in this repot is based on a short term model, it is socially acceptable to unify two separated regulation levels of CAFE. Last, recognizing the partial success of VA, it is necessary to examine whether VA is free from the free-rider problem. |
