1994
DOI: 10.2307/2555830
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optional Time-of-Use Prices for Electricity: Econometric Analysis of Surplus and Pareto Impacts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These adverse selection issues have been examined in a number of studies. See Ham, Mountain, and Chan [1987], Caves, Herriges, and Kuester [1989] and Train and Mehrez [1994]. Another tariff structure, real-time pricing, requires consumers to pay the actual wholesale price of electricity, varying by hour and day, in addition to transmission and distribution charges.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These adverse selection issues have been examined in a number of studies. See Ham, Mountain, and Chan [1987], Caves, Herriges, and Kuester [1989] and Train and Mehrez [1994]. Another tariff structure, real-time pricing, requires consumers to pay the actual wholesale price of electricity, varying by hour and day, in addition to transmission and distribution charges.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These statistically insignificant and small estimates of income effects on fuel demand indicate the validity of the fuel demand function that does not explicitly take account of any income effect. In fact, Train and Mehrez (1994) assume a linear demand function without any income effect in their analysis of a discrete-continuous model of residential electricity demand.…”
Section: A Discrete-continuous Model Of An Environmentally Differentimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The author also notes that many of the experiments performed with TOU rates could be questionable given that there is an incentive to participate in the experiment, which varies according to consumption level, and thus introduces bias into the sample. The selection bias could also be a consequence of the fact reported by Train and Mehrez (1994) that the consumption level is deeply affected by the consumer price response of participants in the experiment. Since the participants are aware that they are part of an experiment, this may influence their own consumption, as stated by Herter et al (2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%