|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| ||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
1
Introduction, Conclusions, and
Recommendations
INTRODUCTION
From 1973 through 1982 a number of the general trends that
characterized electricity use between 1960 and 1972 showed distinct
changes. The annual percentage change in electricity price, adjusted
for inflation, reversed direction, from a decrease of 3.8 percent per
year to an increase of 4 percent per year. The price of a unit of
electric energy fell from about 7 to about 3 times the price of an
equivalent amount of energy in the form of natural gas and heating oil,
because of the rise in the price of fossil fuels. The rate of growth
in electricity use dropped from 7 to 2 percent per year; and although
formerly it had exceeded real growth rate of gross national product
(GNP), the growth rate fell to approximately the same pace as that of
GNP.
Such changes have led to great uncertainty about the future
relationships between electricity use and economic growth. It is
therefore necessary to examine the forces that now underlie electricity
use and to ask whether basic changes have occurred or are occurring,
either in kind or degree.
Two Important Relationships
Two important relationships between electricity use and the economy are
addressed in this report. One is how electricity use, or demand, in
the usual sense of economics, depends on various economic and technical
factors. The second is how electricity, as an especially high grade of
energy, may facilitate technological advances, and in turn stimulate
the economy, by providing gains in productivity. Our report does not
address the question of electricity supply--that is, which generation
technolog ies in what combinat ions should be used to serve demand .
Ordinary experience suggests that electricity use should depend on
the general level of economic activity, the prices of electricity and
its alternatives, public policy, the regulatory environment, and the
development of novel applications, among other factors. Let us look
briefly at each of these.
1
OCR for page 2
2
o General economic activity is usually represented by GNP. For
detailed analysis it is often important to disaggregate GNP into
sectoral components and to make other disaggregations by geography and
demography as well. In particular, there are important regional
differences in providing and using electricity.
o Electricity prices depend mainly on investment requirements for
all types of plant and equipment, interest rates, fuel costs, and
allowed rates of return. All these cost elements have varied more
since 1972 than they did previously, generally leading to higher
electricity prices.
o The price of fossil fuels rose even more dramatically than that
of electricity during the 1970s. Thus, the price of electricity was
relatively attractive compared to available alternatives, leading to a
growth in electricity use. On the other hand, since the cost of
electricity generation depends in part on the cost of fossil fuels, the
price trends made increased efficiency of electricity use, and
sometimes avoidance of use, more desirable than before. The price
trends also led to the search for less expensive ways of producing with
available technologies and for other methods of generation, such as
cogeneration, wind power, and solar electric power, in the hope of
finding less expensive alternatives.
o Public policy, implemented in various ways at various levels of
government, can also influence electricity consumption. Some policies
act directly, such as those that control prices or that provide
incentives for conservation. Other policies act indirectly, such as
import restrictions and tax preferences for research and development.
Thus the effect of public policy may be felt through factors such as
prices, regulations, and the growth of new applications for
electricity. It is certainly possible to model the effect of any
particular policy, but the net effect of many may be hard to estimate.
o Regulatory constraints influence electricity use, usually
through their effects on price. Regulation may encourage consumption
by keeping prices down, or it may impose added costs to satisfy
requirements for operational safety and environmental protection.
Regulation may create other kinds of barriers to use by limiting the
siting and construction of generating capacity.
o Novel applications for electricity, such as the electric furnace
for steelmaking, are often developed as one aspect of ongoing technical
change of all sorts. Such applications are adopted when they lead to
greater value of output than their incremental cost. The new
applications can increase electricity use through substitution for
other fuels, as in induction heating, or they can decrease electricity
use through greater energy efficiency, as in the replacement of arc
welding by electron beam welding.
Again, since 1973 several factors affecting electricity use have
undergone noticeable changes. For orderly planning by many sectors of
the economy, it is important to know whether these changes will modify
long-term trends connecting electricity use and the economy. Is a
different form for the relationship more appropriate by introducing new
OCR for page 3
3
variables? Or is only some adjustment needed, large or small, in the
numbers that connect the customary variables?
If we address these questions so as to permit informed judgments
about past relationships and future prospects, we shall have gone as
far as we can. The future values of the economic variables themselves
as inputs to consumption models are largely unpredictable. To estimate
them requires not only skill but also-.ucK.
Understanding the relationships between electricity use and the
economy, with regard to both consumption and productivity, is important
in formulating public policy, in regulating the industry, and in
managing individual firms.
When the existing system of supply and demand works well, producing
acceptable economic and social benefits, there is little need for
government intervention beyond the usual activities of the state and
federal regulatory system. A sound system of monitoring and evaluation
is all that is needed. The existing system may, on the other hand, not
work well. For example, the economic costs to a region, or to the
nation, of a shortfall of electric power may be out of proportion to
the cost of adding capacity, even though an individual utility may find
it financially inadvisable to build a new plant. Also, though
consumption may be satisfied, or even reduced, under a current set of
conditions, aggregate productivity benefits from increasing efficiency
or adding capacity may exceed the costs of these steps. In this
context, recall that because of regional variations in electricity
production and use, the adequacy of supply may vary regionally in ways
not reflected by aggregate national data. On the other hand, it may
prove more economical to reduce electricity use or to slow its growth,
by increasing the eff iciency of its use and substituting other
production factors, than to expand supply. In any case, public
policies may help ameliorate problems in the system by means of
legislation, regulatory changes, investment incentives, or stimulation
of research.
With regard to regulation, better knowledge of the relationships
between electricity use and the economy, concerning both aggregate and
particular end uses, should facilitate better decisions on many
issues: rate design, capital investment, required reserve capacity,
fuel contracts, cost recovery rules' and admissible research costs.
With regard to individual f irms, the decisions of utilities as well
as their suppliers would of course benefit from a better grasp of the
interactions at work. At stake for the utilities and, by extension,
their investors, are the consequences of allocating funds among
additional plants, load management equipment, and conservation
measures. Suppliers must anticipate the kinds and amounts of plant
equipment and fuels that futilities will need.
The Structure of the Task
The committee's task, stated more fully in Appendix A, was to look at
the role of "electricity" in "economic growth. " Both these terms are
OCR for page 4
4
familiar but, as in using many terms, we should strive for precise
def inition and connotation.
Economic growth is conventionally measured by GNP. Electricity
service is measured either by installed capacity to deliver power or by
energy consumption. None of these measures expresses everything of
importance for the relationships at issue, as is discussed further in
Appendix B. Nevertheless, we concluded that these measures were
generally those appropriate for our study because of the difficulty of
establishing other adequate ones and the desirability of relating our
own to previous work.
Another term used in the report is "electrification."
Electrification means the adoption of processes and activities based on
the use of electricity. The term connotes an application and
associated equipment that use the special qualities of electricity,
often for innovation. Electrification may increase or decrease
electricity consumption, depending on such factors as whether there is
a change from a nonelectrical to an electrical production technique,
the amount of electricity consumed per unit of output, and the total
units of output produced. The last can be substantially greater than
before if product prices fall because of more eff icient production.
The terms "productivity" and "productivity growth" are used in their
usual economic senses. Productivity means output per unit of input,
measured in appropriate units, whether for a single kind of input or
for a combination of inputs. Productivity growth is the change in
product ivity f ram one point in t ime to another, usually expressed as a
percentage. "Productivity growth rate" is productivity growth per unit
of time.
Figure 1-1 i llustrates the system that we examined. The complexity
of the f igure reflects that of the real situation and thus the
complexity of any useful analysis. We sought to describe the
relationships between the central elements in this diagram:
electrif ication, productivity growth, GNP, and electricity
consumption. We tried to summarize what is currently known about these
relationships and to indicate some uncertainties. To do so we had to
consider several additional factors. These factors include the prices
of electricity and of substitute fuels and the costs of electrical and
nonelectrical processes. We considered direct effects (for example,
the price of electricity on electricity consumption) and also indirect
effects (for example, the income effect of conservation and
electrif ication, f reeing resources for other uses). When possible we
tried to quantify these relationships when referring to the past; we
could discuss them only qualitatively when referring to the future.
The various chapters focus on different parts of Figure 1-1.
Chapter 2 discusses the historical relationship between electricity
consumption and GNP. Electricity consumption is first analyzed as a
function of GNP. Gross product originating (GPO) and disposable
personal income (OPI) are then used as measures in a finer analysis to
reflect economic activity in different sectors. The central subject of
Chapter 2 i s depicted in the right central part of Figure 1-1: the
arrow between GNP and electricity consumption points to the right
OCR for page 5
5
Regu ration
~ Technolo~
| Electrification
Productivity
Growth
Commercial ~
Price of
Substitute Fuels
Residential 1~
Income
Eiectricity
Using Devices
~;= ~
Product -~ Consumption
~ I nd ustria I
SUPPLY
D EMAN D
FIGURE 1-1 Relationships affecting electricity and economic growth.
OCR for page 6
6
because we consider how the level of economic activity affects
electricity consumption. A later part of Chapter 2 discusses available
evidence on how both the price of electricity and the price of
nonelectric (substitute) fuels have affected electricity consumption.
The influence of price links the left (or supply) side of the diagram
with the right (or demand) side.
Chapter 3 looks at the role of electricity in productivity growth.
Productivity growth is one of three inputs to economic growth, the
others being capital and labor growth. This chapter finds that the
electrification of productive processes, as one type of technical
change, may have special effects on productivity growth. As is shown
in Chapter 4, these effects are due to the flexibility and high quality
of electricity as energy in application. Chapter 3 demonstrates that
the prices of both electricity and other fuels, along with their
technical characteristics, do influence productivity growth in most
industries. The relationships among these variables are depicted in
the left and central parts of Figure 1-1.
Chapter 4 looks at examples of the influence of electrification on
economic activity, emphasizing further technical potentials. This
chapter discusses the characteristics of various forms of
electrification, their potential engineering and economic effects on
general productive efficiency, and whether they may result in a net
increase or decrease in electricity consumption per unit of output.
This discussion is illustrated by some examples of technical change in
different sectors of the economy. The examples show how
electrification affects efficiency for the process and the firm and, by
implication, how these gains can provide productivity growth in the
aggregate. Chapter 4 is represented by the lower left corner of Figure
1-1. ~
In Chapter ~ we return to the subject of Chapter 2, but with
attention to the future. Given the current uncertainty about whether
the recent relationship between electricity use and GNP continues as
before, we cannot foretell a precise future relationship between these
variables. Furthermore, we are in no position to forecast the future
growth rates of GNP and prices. Even so, we can consider the forces
likely to influence the relationship between GNP and electricity use,
for example, changes in the composition of national output, the prices
of electricity and nonelectric fuels, and energy conservation. We also
note that these forces have both direct and indirect influences. For
instance, the individual consumer who realizes the benefits of
conservation will enjoy greater disposable income. Similarly, if
future electrification leads to greater overall productive efficiency
and to lower electricity use per unit of output, this indirect effect
on disposable income should lead to greater expenditures on goods and
services. In turn, this would increase electricity demand according to
the strong correlation that has held between GNP growth and the growth
in electricity use. Thus, Chapter 5 addresses the possible future
relationships among most of the elements of our diagram, but in a
qualitative way.
OCR for page 7
7
These chapters together provide the information and analysis on
which we based our conclusions. For the reader's convenience, our
principal conclusions, along with statements of our rationale, appear
below, and then our recommendations, which flow from these conclusions.
CONCLUS IONS
Electricity Consumption
Electricity use and gross national product have been, and probably
will continue to be, strongly correlated.
Numerous representations of the relationships between economic
activity and electricity use are possible.* We considered a number of
these representations and discuss some in the report. The relationship
we emphasize is based on considerations of simplicity and of adequacy
in satisfying the committee's task. This relationship is at a high
level of aggregation (between total electricity use and GNP) and takes
a simple functional form (linear) such that one principal variable,
GNP, is capable of explaining much of the variation in the other,
electricity use, as they both change with the passage of time.
In this century, the electricity use-economic activity relationship
has been characterized by four well-defined periods. Within each
period, the relationship has been linear and stable. The first period
was prior to World War I and the second from the end of World War I
through the 1920s. In the third period, from 1930 through the end of
World World II, the linear relationship paralleled that of the 1920s.
The fourth period began after World War II and may still be continuing,
although the relationship holding after the 1973 Arab oil embargo is
still in dispute. We cannot tell conclusively whether the relationship
after 1973 simply reflects variations from the most recent trend line,
such as have occurred before, or whether a fundamental change in the
relationship is taking place.
. .
*The possibilities encompass various aggregations of data (by nation,
sector, region, or household), various functional forms of the
relationship (linear or another form of growth curve), the addition of
potentially relevant variables (population and household data, prices,
inventories of electricity-using equipment, labor force data, and
time), and various transformations of variables from their "natural"
units (for example, kilowatt hours and dollars) to other forms, such
as annual percentage increases. What we know does not allow us to
disentangle the individual roles of all the possibly relevant variables
in the electricity-economic activity relationship. Moreover, obviously
no one formulation is best for all purposes. For example, a linear
formulation may best illustrate the long-term historical record, while
certain logarithmic representations may best serve more specific
analytical needs.
OCR for page 8
8
Historic trends in the electricity use-GNP relationship include the
effects of a host of factors not explicitly identified in the linear
equation representing it. Among those believed important are the
prices of electricity and competing energy forms, the composition of
national output, regional economic activity, technical change,
conservation practices, and government policies. Only when there are
major perturbations in the trends (not simply movements about the trend
lines) of these underlying variables would changes in the basic
electricity use-GNP relationship be expected. Even then, some effects
may cancel each other (such as rises in both electricity and other
energy prices). Lesser variations in these underlying variables
produce temporary deviations from the electricity use-GNP
relationship. Two forces believed capable of altering the trends of
future electricity use-economic activity relationships are
electrification and conservation. However, their potential effects,
like those of the other underlying variables, are not readily
quantified.
Electricity and nonelectrical energy prices are generally
acknowledged as factors determining electricity consumption. However,
by far the most important contribution to explaining consumption in the
past has been GNP. The observed departure on occasion of electricity
consumption from the main trend line may be explained in part by taking
price changes into account. Furthermore, there is an implicit
dependence of electricity consumption on energy prices through the
dependence of GNP in part on productivity g rowth, which in turn is
shown to depend partly on energy prices.
Productivity Growth
Productivity growth may be ascribed partly to technical change; in
many industries technical change also tends to increase the relative
share of electricity in the value of output, and in these industries
productivity growth is found to be the greater the lower the real
price of electricity, and vice versa.
Economic growth, or percentage change in GNP, results from growth in
three factors: capital input, labor input, and productivity.
Productivity accounts for increases in output in excess of the
contribution of the first two factors. Productivity growth for the
economy as a whole derives mainly from sectoral productivity growth and
any reallocations of value added, capital input, and labor input among
the sectors of the economy.
The decline in the rate of U.S. economic growth since the early
1970s is associated with a decline in sectoral productivity growth
rates rather than a reduction in the aggregate growth rate of capital
and labor inputs or the reallocation of value added, capital input, or
labor input among sectors. Chapter 3 shows that this sectoral decline
in productivity growth is strongly associated with an increase in
energy prices.
OCR for page 9
9
Sectoral productivity growth may be modeled as a function of the
relative prices of major inputs--capital, labor, electricity,
nonelectric energy, and materials--and the level of technology e One
comprehensive model of this sort shows that technical change and
reduced electricity prices have a related effect on many industries.
First, for these industries technical change is electricity using; that
is, it is found to increase the contribution, relative to those of
other inputs to production, that a given change in electricity input
value makes to change in output value and so tends to increase the
relative share of electricity in the value of output. Second, for the
same industries the productivity growth arising from the technical
change increases as electricity prices decrease, and conversely.
Such effects are found for nonelectrical energy in even more
industries.
The decline in the real cost of electricity, which resulted in part
from dramatic increases in the thermal efficiency of electric
generation, increased electricity use and stimulated productivity
growth until the early 1970s. The reversal in the decline of
electricity costs, combined with a rise in the prices of primary fuels
after the international oil price increases of 1973 and 1979, has
permanently reduced productivity in many industries from what it would
otherwise have been. This result may be explained partly by the
substitution of less efficient inputs for these energy inputs.
Technical Change
Technical change has made possible many new opportunities for
exploiting the special qualities of electricity. In the past these
changes were of ten associated with increased intensity of
-
electricity use, but in the future their net effect on that
.
intensity will depend on the balance between their increased
penetration and the increased efficiency of these applications.
Once generated, electricity has unique properties that make it an
attractive form of energy. These properties include a highly ordered
form (including the ability to be focused for efficient use and to
produce very high temperatures), flexibility, and cleanliness of use.
There is substantial potential in the major consuming sectors for
further applications of electrical energy that take advantage of these
special properties. We call such innovations electrification.
There are several different forms of electrification: (1) changing
either old or new processes so that they rely on electricity rather
than on fossil fuels, or direct wind or water as a source of mechanical
energy, or human labor--changes generally associated with an increase
in the intensity of electricity use; (2) converting older
electrotechnologies (such as motor drive in manufacturing) to advanced
ones to meet end-use requirements better--changes that often increase
economic efficiency and may either increase or decrease the intensity
of electricity use; and (3) the rapid penetration of new activities
that depend on electricity, such as the growth in the use of
OCR for page 10
10
computerized techniques--changes that may either increase or decrease
the intensity of electricity use.
Some kinds of electrification increase electricity intensity
(electricity use per unit of economic output) through wider application
of electrical processes. Some kinds decrease electricity intensity
through productivity gains. In the aggregate it is found that the
increase in electricity intensity with GNP is relatively small because
the two effects tend to be offsetting.
Electrification can change not only the form of energy used but also
the share and absolute quantity of other inputs, including labor,
capital, and materials. In addition product quality and even
manufacturing location can be affected. Technical change in the form
of electrification has historically contributed to increased
productivity and thereby to increases in GNP. We can expect this trend
to continue.
The Effects of Price Changes
Electricity prices and alternative fuel prices affect electricity
consumption in two ways: first, they directly affect the use of
electricity and nonelectric fuels as input factors of production;
second, they indirectly affect productivity growth and thereby
economic growth.
If electricity prices alone rise (for example, because of a rise in
plant and equipment prices), electricity use will decrease in
accordance with elasticity of demand with respect to its own price.
This result will occur through improving the efficiency of electricity
use and through substituting other inputs for electricity.
A rise in the price of those fuels that compete with electricity,
without a corresponding increase in the price of electricity, will
increase electricity consumption because of elasticity of demand with
respect to the prices of other fuels.
If electricity prices rise because of a rise in primary fuel prices,
a reduction in electricity use through its own-price elasticity will
occur and be offset to some degree by an increase in the use of
electricity as a substitute for primary fuels, that is, through
cross-price elasticity. The numerical values of these elasticities
have not been well established, but current estimates of price
elasticities suggest that the two effects may cancel each other.
Any increase in the real price of electricity will indirectly
further decrease electricity use because it will lower productivity
growth rates in many industries, in turn leading to a lower rate of
economic growth.
Reductions in electricity prices yield an opposite set of results,
as indicated historically.
OCR for page 11
11
Conservation
There is further potential for increasing the efficiency of
electricity use, particularly in the residential and commercial
sectors.
Promising technologies have been identified for increasing the
efficiency of electricity use. Their greatest promise is in the
residential and commercial sectors, where there has been less
investment in efficiency improvements than in the industrial sector
since the Arab oil embargo. Energy price increases provide incentive
for investments in conservation. The main constraints to such
investment have been immaturity of the technologies, lack of
information, lack of capitalization funds, inefficient electricity and
fuel pricing, and doubts about the cost-effectiveness of such
investment.
Of particular interest for the residential and commercial sectors
are potential improvements in building envelopes and lighting systems,
which can be incorporated in new construction and retrofitted to
existing buildings. Although these improvements may themselves reduce
the intensity of electricity use, there may be other factors, hard to
predict, that increase electricity consumption through new uses of
electricity in production and household applications. In addition,
many established uses of electricity, such as for air conditioning and
electric space heating, still show potential market growth.
The effects of residential conservation investments do not show up
directly in sectoral productivity measures. However, their
macroeconomic effect may be evidenced in a change in the composition of
sectoral output and in changes in consumption f ram the income effect of
reduced energy costs. In the commercial and industrial sectors those
conservation measures that are cost-effective would appear in measures
of sectoral productivity g rowth.
Evidence of success in conservation and load management is provided
by programs implemented by electric and gas ''tilities. Conservation
and load management, if cost-effective, can also benefit economic
growth by reducing the costs of electricity supply, and thus the price
of electricity, through improving the efficiency of existing and new
generating facilities in producing given levels of electric energy.
The Composition of National Output
Changes in the composition of national output toward less
electricity-intensive goods and services have been offset by growth
in the intensity of electr ic ity use within all the ma jor use sectors
so that the combined ef feet on electric ity demand g rowth has not yet
been great. However, if the trend toward a leveling off in sectoral
electricity intensity growth that began in the late 1970s continues,
future shifts toward less electricity-intensive goods and services
are likely to dampen electricity demand growth relative to national
output.
OCR for page 12
12
Looking at the sectoral composition of national output is one means
of analyzing structural changes in the economy. Gross product
originating (GPO) in producing sectors is often used to measure and
compare their output. Employment figures are also widely used, but
they are not as useful as GPO in analyzing the relationships of
electricity use to other factors since they account for only one of the
inputs to sectoral output.
Since 1950 the share of GPO in the commercial sector has increased
steadily, while that in the industrial sector as a whole has declined.
This decline is almost entirely due to a decrease in the relative
importance of agriculture, mining, and construction as components of
the industrial sector. The share of manufacturing GPO remained fairly
constant over the entire postwar period, although within manufacturing
there has been a shift toward less electricity-intensive industries.
The electricity intensity of the industrial sector is about three
times that of the commercial sector, so that shifts away from industry,
all other things being equal, would lead to a decline in electricity
intensity for the total economy. However, there were large increases
in average electricity intensity in all three of the major consuming
sectors after World War II, which more than counteracted the negative
influence on overall electricity intensity of the shift from industrial
to commercial output. Almost all the growth in average sectoral
electricity intensity occurred prior to 1973; by 1983 industrial and
commercial sector electricity intensities were back near their 1973
values, while residential electricity intensity remained stable from
about 1977. It is uncertain whether recent declines in sectoral
electricity intensity growth represent the beginning of a new long-term
trend or a response to short-term influences.
Regional Differences
Valid conclusions about electricity demand drawn from national data
do not necessarily pertain to regional circumstances; there are
significant regional differences in such factors as economic output,
prices, electricity supply mix, availability of generating capacity,
climate, and regulatory environment.
With regard to economic activity, the regional factors important to
electricity consumption include overall level of output, industry mix,
labor and resource availability, and the relative importance of a
region's commercial and industrial sectors. With regard to energy use,
important regional factors include electricity and nonelectric energy
prices, electricity supply mix, climate, and regulation. Shifts in
demographic characteristics and regional activity may alter national
electricity use patterns, although probably gradually and in a small
way. National policy decisions should be sensitive to important
regional differences.
OCR for page 13
13
RECOMMENDAT IONS
The principal focus of this study is a better understanding of the
complex relationships between electricity use and economic growth. Two
important conclusions underlie the recommendations that follow.
there has been a strong correlation between the use of
First,
_ electricity and
the magnitude of GNP. Second, the recent research described in Chapter
3 was judged sufficiently significant to put forward with some
confidence its thesis that there is a strong connection between
electricity and productivity growth.
1. The relationship between electricity and productivity is so
important that it should be considered in developing federal and
state energy and economic policies.
Productivity growth is central to solving many problems facing the
United States, ranging from the federal deficit to the balance of
trade. Consequently, all possibilities of ~ , ,_ _ ~
growth, including attention to electricity supply and use, should be
evaluated and pursued in accord with their promise.
* * * * *
At ~ ml1 1 at i no nrn~lil~t. i wi EN
2. To foster increased productivity, policy should stimulate
increased efficiency of electricity use, promote the implementation
of elect~otechnclogies when they are economically justified, and
seek to lower the real costs of electricity supply by removing any
regulatory impediments and developing promising technologies to
provide electricity.
The findings of this report establish a connection between
electricity and productivity growth.
~_ . . ~. .
The two factors that must coexist
to realize the productivity growth associated with electricity are
technical change and favorable electricity supply conditions. In
addition, cost-effective increases in the efficiency of electricity use
will themselves not only increase productive output for a given input
, . . . .. , . ~ . . ,
~ These points
suggest that federal and state policies that promote lowering the real
costs of electricity supply and use, through research and development
or through more efficient pricing by regulatory authorities, will
benefit productivity growth.
or elects 1C lay out also tree Income tor other Purposes.
* * * * *
3. Further research should be undertaken to identify and quantify
the forces affecting the relationships between electricity and
economic growth in view of their critical importance, complexity,
and regional diversity.
OCR for page 14
14
The strong and persistent relationship between electricity use and GNP
requires that close attention be paid to the adequacy of electricity
supply to sustain a high future rate of economic growth. The adequacy
of electricity supply can be maintained not only through new generation
facilities but also through efficiency improvements that use existing
generating capacity better. Although favorable electricity supply
conditions of themselves will not assure economic growth, a lack of
adequate supply would almost certainly constitute a serious impediment
to such growth. In making this point we are keenly aware of the need
to learn more about the correlations and the causal relationships
between economic growth and electricity use. As pointed out above,
well directed policy, regulation, and management decisions rest on such
knowledge. It should be systematically sought and better established.
Otherwise progress toward greater economic efficiency, innovation, and
competition may suf fer .
Representative terms from entire chapter:
electricity consumption
