! The Energy Journal

Energy Journal Issue

The Energy Journal
Volume 2, Number 4

IAEE Members and subscribers to The Energy Journal: Please log in to access the full text article or receive discounted pricing for this article.

View Cart  

Oil and Energy Demand in Developing Countries in 1990

Charles Wolf, Jr., Daniel A. Relles, Jaime Navarro

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-1
View Abstract

How much of the world's oil and energy supply will the non-OPEC less developed countries (NOLDCs) demand in the next decade? Will their requirements be small and thus fairly insignificant compared with world demand, or large and relatively important? How will world demand be affected by the economic growth of the NOLDCs?In the study on which this article is based, we try to develop some reasonable forecasts of NOLDC energy demands in the next 10 years.' Our focus is mainly on the demand for oil, but we also give some attention to the total commercial energy requirements of these countries. We have tried to be explicit about the uncertainties associated with our forecasts, and with the income and price elasticities on which they are based.

Expansio ad Absurdum

Amory Lovins

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-2
View Abstract

In 1977 I had the pleasure of Wolf Hafele's hospitality atIIASA while writing Soft Energy Paths. I have since been followinghis group's activities and looking forward to seeing what their protracted and costly energy study might produce. Already being extensively publicized as a careful, comprehensive, and objective assessment of long-term energy options, valuable for both policy makers and their constituents, the IIASA study is being given considerablecredence by the credulous, and often the benefit of the doubt by those too busy, bemused, or inexpert to dig into its bulky technical details.

Energy in a Finite World-Expansio ad Absurdum? A Rebuttal

Wolf Hafele

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-3
View Abstract

In commenting on the IIASA global energy study, Amory Lovins (1981) implicitly maintains that only those who hold his extreme views are objective. If not, the analyst is dismissed as being subjective, of low technical ability, and mindless. A scrutiny of Lovins's highly repetitive statements reveals that he is essentially saying two things.

Natural Gas Curtailment Policy: Where Do We Go from Here?

George R. HallVice

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-4
View Abstract

Natural gas production in the United States peaked in 1973 at 22.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) per year and has averaged about 19 Tcf each year since then. A more basic measure of natural gas supply is reserve additions, the amount of natural gas added to the nation's producible inventory. Reserve additions dropped precipitously in 1967, from 21 Tcf to 13.7 Tcf per year. Since then, they have fluctuated around 9 Tcf per year.

Supplemental Sources of Natural Gas: An Economic Comparison

Alvin Kaufman, Susan J. Bodilly

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-5
View Abstract

Over the past decade, the United States has become increasingly dependent on imported energy, and there has been an attendant impact on the balance of payments. For example, 43 percent of the oil used in the United States was imported in the first six months of 1979, compared with 35 percent in 1973. Of these 1979 imports, 67 percent was supplied by the OPEC countries, including 40 percent from Arab producers. During the six months preceding the 1973-74 embargo, Arab producers supplied only 15 percent of U.S. imported oil. At the same time, OPEC oil has increased in price, through the machinations of the cartel. The massive income transfer is indicated by the rise in the U.S. oil balance of payments bill, from $3.4 billion inthe first six months of 1973 to $24.4 billion during the first six months of 1979.

The Price Elasticity for Gasoline Revisited

Rolando F. Pelaez

DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol2-No4-6
View Abstract

Energy conservation has been a major goal of three administrations, yet disagreement about how to achieve it has hampered conservation efforts. Advocates of nonmarket rationing claim that gasoline demand is highly inelastic, and hence that higher prices would result mainly in substantial income redistribution. In contrast, economists typically point to the price mechanism as the best method for promoting conservation. Clearly the issue depends to a great degree on the price elasticity of demand for energy. Since nearly one-half of the petroleum consumed in the United States is used as motor fuel, this note focuses on the price elasticity for gasoline.


© 2024 International Association for Energy Economics | Privacy Policy | Return Policy