Abstract
The conventional distinction between ‘economic’ and ‘engineering’ approaches to energy analysis obscures key methodological issues concerning the measurement of the costs and benefits of policies to promote the adoption of energy-efficient technologies. The engineering approach is in fact based upon firm economic foundations: the principle of lifecycle cost minimization that arises directly from the theory of rational investment. Thus, evidence that so-called ‘market barriers’ impede the adoption of cost-effective energy-efficient technologies implies the existence of market failures as defined in the context of microeconomic theory. Problems of imperfect information and bounded rationality on the part of consumers, for example, may lead real world outcomes to deviate from the dictates of efficient resource allocation. A widely held contrary view, that the engineering view lacks economic justification, is based on the fallacy that markets are ‘normally’ efficient.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
