IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i4p1432-1443.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Power from Perspective: Potential future United States energy portfolios

Author

Listed:
  • Tonn, Bruce
  • Healy, K.C.
  • Gibson, Amy
  • Ashish, Ashutosh
  • Cody, Preston
  • Beres, Drew
  • Lulla, Sam
  • Mazur, Jim
  • Ritter, A.J.

Abstract

This paper presents United States energy portfolios for the year 2030, developed from seven different Perspectives. The Perspectives are characterized by different weights placed on fourteen defining values (e.g., cost, social acceptance). The portfolios were constructed to achieve three primary goals, energy independence, energy security, and greenhouse gas reductions. The portfolios are also evaluated over a comprehensive set of secondary criteria (e.g., economic growth, technical feasibility). It is found that very different portfolios based on very different defining values can achieve the three primary goals. Commonalities among the portfolios include reliance upon cellulosic ethanol, nuclear power, and energy efficiency to meet year 2030 energy demands. It is concluded that the US energy portfolio must be diverse and to achieve national energy goals will require an explicit statement of goals, a strong role for government, and coordinated action across society.

Suggested Citation

  • Tonn, Bruce & Healy, K.C. & Gibson, Amy & Ashish, Ashutosh & Cody, Preston & Beres, Drew & Lulla, Sam & Mazur, Jim & Ritter, A.J., 2009. "Power from Perspective: Potential future United States energy portfolios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1443, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:4:p:1432-1443
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(08)00746-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Cooper, Christopher, 2007. "Big Is Beautiful: The Case for Federal Leadership on a National Renewable Portfolio Standard," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 48-61, May.
    2. Benjamin Sovacool, 2008. "The problem with the “portfolio approach” in American energy policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(3), pages 245-261, September.
    3. Margarita Alario & William Freudenburg, 2006. "High‐risk Technology, Legitimacy and Science: The U.S. Search for Energy Policy Consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(7), pages 737-753.
    4. Wiser, Ryan & Namovicz, Christopher & Gielecki, Mark & Smith, Robert, 2007. "The Experience with Renewable Portfolio Standards in the United States," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 8-20, May.
    5. Kilbourne, William E. & Beckmann, Suzanne C. & Thelen, Eva, 2002. "The role of the dominant social paradigm in environmental attitudes: a multinational examination," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 193-204, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bruce Tonn & Paul Frymier & Jared Graves & Jessa Meyers, 2010. "A Sustainable Energy Scenario for the United States: Year 2050," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(12), pages 1-31, November.
    2. Zambujal-Oliveira, João & Mouta-Lopes, Manuel & Bangueses, Ricardo, 2021. "Real options appraisal of forestry investments under information scarcity in biomass markets," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    3. Kialashaki, Arash & Reisel, John R., 2014. "Development and validation of artificial neural network models of the energy demand in the industrial sector of the United States," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 749-760.
    4. Michelle C. Hamilton & Shital A. Thekdi & Elisabeth M. Jenicek & Russell S. Harmon & Michael E. Goodsite & Michael P. Case & Christopher W. Karvetski & James H. Lambert, 2013. "Case studies of scenario analysis for adaptive management of natural resource and infrastructure systems," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 89-103, March.
    5. Guo Li & Wenling Liu & Zhaohua Wang & Mengqi Liu, 2017. "An empirical examination of energy consumption, behavioral intention, and situational factors: evidence from Beijing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 507-524, August.
    6. Kosnik, Lea, 2010. "The potential for small scale hydropower development in the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5512-5519, October.
    7. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2011. "Emerging symbiosis: Renewable energy and energy security," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4572-4578.
    8. Jinchao Li & Lina Wang & Tianzhi Li & Shaowen Zhu, 2019. "Energy Security Pattern Spatiotemporal Evolution and Strategic Analysis of G20 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Rejecting renewables: The socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4500-4513, November.
    2. Xiao Tang & Zhengwen Liu & Hongtao Yi, 2016. "Mandatory Targets and Environmental Performance: An Analysis Based on Regression Discontinuity Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Chandler, Jess, 2009. "Trendy solutions: Why do states adopt Sustainable Energy Portfolio Standards?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3274-3281, August.
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2011. "The policy challenges of tradable credits: A critical review of eight markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 575-585, February.
    5. Prasad, Ajnesh & Holzinger, Ingo, 2013. "Seeing through smoke and mirrors: A critical analysis of marketing CSR," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1915-1921.
    6. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How do electoral competition and special interests shape the stringency of renewable energy standards?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(1), pages 23-34, January.
    7. Gilbert Metcalf, 2008. "Tax Policy for Financing Alternative Energy Equipment," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0716, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    8. Jun Guan Neoh & Maxwell Chipulu & Alasdair Marshall, 2017. "What encourages people to carpool? An evaluation of factors with meta-analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 423-447, March.
    9. Toke Christensen & Mirjam Godskesen & Kirsten Gram-Hanssen & Maj-Britt Quitzau & Inge Røpke, 2007. "Greening the Danes? Experience with consumption and environment policies," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 91-116, June.
    10. Seles, Bruno Michel Roman Pais & de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes & Jabbour, Charbel José Chiappetta & Dangelico, Rosa Maria, 2016. "The green bullwhip effect, the diffusion of green supply chain practices, and institutional pressures: Evidence from the automotive sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 342-355.
    11. Nadine E. van der Waal & Frans Folkvord & Rachid Azrout & Corine S. Meppelink, 2022. "Can Product Information Steer towards Sustainable and Healthy Food Choices? A Pilot Study in an Online Supermarket," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Kathleen Rodenburg & Kelly MacDonald, 2021. "Enhancing Business Schools’ Pedagogy on Sustainable Business Practices and Ethical Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-26, May.
    13. Johnson, Sean D. & Moyer, Elisabeth J., 2012. "Feasibility of U.S. renewable portfolio standards under cost caps and case study for Illinois," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 499-514.
    14. Edit Kővári & Katalin Formádi & Zsuzsanna Banász, 2023. "The Green Attitude of Four European Capitals of Culture’s Youth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Christoph Heinzel & Thomas Winkler, 2011. "Economic functioning and politically pragmatic justification of tradable green certificates in Poland," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 13(2), pages 157-175, June.
    16. Daim, Tugrul & Cowan, Kelly, 2010. "Assessing renewable energy portfolio futures with multiple perspectives: The case of the northwest US," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 255-263.
    17. Diego A. Vazquez-Brust & José Antonio Plaza-Úbeda, 2021. "What Characteristics Do the Firms Have That Go Beyond Compliance with Regulation in Environmental Protection? A Multiple Discriminant Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, February.
    18. Gray, Rob, 2010. "Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability...and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 47-62, January.
    19. Farboud Khatami & Erfan Goharian, 2022. "Beyond Profitable Shifts to Green Energies, towards Energy Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-28, April.
    20. Munoz, Francisco D. & Pumarino, Bruno J. & Salas, Ignacio A., 2017. "Aiming low and achieving it: A long-term analysis of a renewable policy in Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 304-314.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:4:p:1432-1443. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.