| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
180098
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The path towards light-duty vehicle electrification promises benefits like lower costs for drivers and reduced environmental externalities for all. Incentives such as electric vehicle rebates assist with alleviating high capital costs of alternative fuel cars. We uncover distributional effects of plug-in electric vehicle rebates, focusing on a program in the State of California. We use economic attributes representative of populations of census tracts as well as data on rebates distributed to plug-in electric vehicle buyers through the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project from 2010 to 2018. Horizontal and vertical equity measures are evaluated, while measurement of spatial association characterizes spatial patterns of rebates allocation across the State. We evaluate the distributional fairness of rebates allocation between income groups and disadvantaged communities. We find that rebates have been predominantly given to high income electric vehicle buyers. However, the share of rebates distributed to low-income groups and disadvantaged communities increased over time and after an income-cap policy was put into effect. Spatial analysis shows high spatial clustering effects and rebates concentration in major metropolitan regions. We reveal neighborhood effects: communities with lower median income or disadvantaged receive higher rebate amounts when these are geographic neighbors to clusters characterized as high rebate amount receivers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
162928
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The economic and environmental benefits of efficiency are typically assessed assuming that all consumers use appliances in the same way. There are, however, significant differences in consumer usage patterns, as well as geographical variability in prices and environmental impacts of electricity. To explore the importance of heterogeneity, we first develop distributions of consumer-by-consumer economic benefits from purchasing an efficient versus standard appliance for televisions, clothes washers, and dryers in the U.S. We find large variability, e.g. for washers and dryers, 9% and 7.5% of the U.S. population do not save money over the lifetime of an efficient device, while 11% and 17% save more than twice that of an average consumer. Providing personalized savings information can thus inform and better motivate those consumers who would save more. Abatement costs for carbon and electricity use are similarly heterogenous as consumer economic benefits, indicating that adoption by heavy users is in the public as well as private interest. The cost of abating carbon via a utility appliance rebate program varies greatly by consumer. To scope the emission benefits of targeted adoption, we find that adoption by heavy users saves around 3 times more carbon than an average user for 10% participation in an efficiency program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|