Skip to main content
Log in

Thermodynamics and process analysis for future economic scenarios

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Economists are increasingly interested in forecasting future costs and benefits of policies for dealing with materials/energy fluxes, polluting emissions and environmental impacts on various scales, from sectoral to global. Computable general equilibrium (CGE) models are currently popular because they project demand and industrial structure into the future, along an equilibrium path. But they are applicable only to the extent that structural changes occur in or near equilibrium, independent of radical technological (or social) change. The alternative tool for analyzing economic implications of scenario assumptions is to use Leontief-type Input-Output (I-O) models. I-O models are unable to endogenize structural shifts (changing I-O coefficients). However, this can be a virtue when considering radical rather than incremental shifts. Postulated I-O tables can be used independently to check the internal consistency of scenarios. Or I-O models can be used to generate scenarios by linking them to econometric ‘macro-drivers’ (which can, in principle, be CGE models). Explicit process analysis can be integrated, in principle, with I-O models. This hybrid scheme provides a natural means of satisfying physical constraints, especially the first and second laws of thermodynamics. This is important, to avoid constructing scenarios based on physically impossible processes. Process analysis is really the only available tool for constructing physically plausible alternative future I-O tables, and generating materials/energy and waste emissions coefficients. Explicit process analysis also helps avoid several problems characteristic of ‘pure’ CGE or I-O models, viz. (1) aggregation errors (2) inability to handle arbitrary combinations of co-product and co-input relationships and (3) inability to reflect certain non-linearities such as internal feedback loops.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almon, Clopper M. Jr., M. B. Buckley, L. M. Horwitz and T. C. Reimbold (1974),Interindustry Forecasts of the American Economy, Heath, Lexington MASS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, Robert U. (1978),Resources, Environment & Economics: Applications of the Materials/Energy Balance Principle, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, Robert U. and Allan V. Kneese (1969), ‘Production, Consumption and Externalities’,American Economic Review. Reprinted inBenchmark Papers in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, Daltz and Pentell (eds.), Dowden, Hutchison & Ross, Stroudsberg 1974 & Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series, NY 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, Robert U. and Katalin Martinàs (1994), ‘Waste Potential Entropy: The Ultimate Ecotoxic?’, in S. Faucheux (ed.), special issue ofEconomique Applique, in press, 1995.

  • Bergman, Lars (1991), ‘General Equilibrium Effects of Environmental Policy: A CGE Modelling Approach’,Environmental & Resource Economics 1, 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, Lars (1993),General Equilibrium Costs & Benefits of Environmental Policies: Some Preliminary Results Based on Swedish Data, EARE Conference, European Association of Resource Economists, Fontainebleau France, June 30–July 3, 1993.

  • Brundtand, G. H. (ed.) (1987),Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, New York (Report of the WCED).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, Klaus and Iris Henseler-Unger (1986), ‘Applied General Equilibrium Modeling for Long-Term Energy Policy in Germany’,Journal of Policy Modeling 8, 531–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, Klaus and Michael Schroeder (1991), ‘Controlling Air Pollution: The Effects of Alternative Energy Policy Approaches’, in Siebert, ed.,Environmental Scarcity: The International Dimension, Chapter I: 35–53, J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tuebingen.

  • Duchin, Faye and Glenn-Marie Lange with Knut Thonstad and Annemarth Idenburg (1992),Strategies for Environmentally Sound Economic Development, Institute for Economic Analysis, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchin, Faye and D. Szyld (1985), ‘A Dynamic Input-Output Model with Assured Positive Output’,Metroeconomics 37, 269–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, Jae A., J. M. Reilly, R. H. Gardner and A. Brenkert (1986),Uncertainty in Future Global Energy Use & Fossil Fuel CO 2 Emissions, 1975 to 2075, Technical Report (TRO36, DO3/NBB-0081), National Technical Information Service, United States Department of Commerce, Springfield VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, Jae A. and J. M. Reilly (1985),Global Energy — Assessing the Future, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbone, L. G. and H. Abilock (1987), ‘MARKAL, a Linear Programming Model for Energy Systems Analysis’,Energy Research 5, 353–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas (1971),The Entropy Law & the Economic Process, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas (1979), ‘Myths About Energy & Matter’,Growth & Change 10(1).

  • Goulder, Lawrence H. (1992),Do the Costs of A Carbon Tax Vanish When Interactions with Other Taxes are Accounted For?, Working Paper (406), National Bureau for Economic Research, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulder, Lawrence H. and Lawrence H. Summers (1989), ‘Tax Policy, Asset Prices & Growth: A General Equilibrium Analysis’,Journal of Public Economics 38, 265–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, Martin and David Eckroth (eds.) (1985),Kirk-Othmer Concise Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, A Wiley-Interscience Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildenbrand, Werner (1981), ‘Short-Run Production Functions Based on Microdata’,Econmetrica 49(50), 1095–1126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson, Dale W., D. T. Slesnick and P. J. Wilcoxen (1992), ‘Carbon Taxes & Economic Welfare’, in:Brookings Papers: Microeconomics: 393–431, 451–454, Brookings Institute, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson, Dale W. and Peter J. Wilcoxen (1990), ‘Intertemporal General Equilibrium Modeling of U.S. Environmental Regulation’,Journal of Policy Modeling 12, 715–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson, Dale W. and Peter J. Wilcoxen (1990), ‘Environmental Regulation & U.S. Economic Growth’,RAND Journal of Economics 21, 314–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, Tjalling C. (ed.) (1951),Activity Analysis of Production & Allocation (Series: Cowles Commission Monograph) (13), John Wiley & Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutcher, Ron E. (1973), ‘The U.S. Economy in 1985’,Monthly Labor Review.

  • Leontief, Wassily W. (1970), ‘Environmental Repercussions & the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach’,Review of Economic Statistics 52, 62–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontief, Wassily W. (1974), ‘Structure of the World Economy: Outline of a Simple Input-Output Formulation’,American Economic Review 64(5), December 1974 (Nobel Lecture, Stockholm, Sweden, December 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontief, Wassily W. Ann Carter and P. Petri (1977),Future of the World Economy, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenheim, Frederick A. and Marguerite K. Moran (1975),Faith, Keyes, & Clark's ‘Industrial Chemical’, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 4th edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manne, Alan S. and Richard G. Richels (1989), ‘CO2 Emission Limits: An Economic Analysis for the USA’,The Energy Journal, November 1989, 51–74.

  • Manne, Alan S. and Richard G. Richels (1991), ‘Global CO2 Emission Reductions: The Impacts of Rising Energy Costs’, in Tester, Jefferson W., David O. Wood and Nancy A. Ferrari, eds.,Energy & the Environment in the 21st Century, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinàs, Katalin and Robert U. Ayres (1993),SEntropy, Information & Evolutionary Selection, Working Paper (93/59/EPS), INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, Samuel C., Barry D. Solomon, Douglas Hill, John Lee and Gary Goldstein (1990), ‘A Least Cost Energy Analysis of U.S. CO2 Reduction Options’, in Tester, Jefferson W., David O. Wood and Nancy A. Ferrari, eds.,Energy & the Environment in the 21st Century, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, William D. and Gary Yohe (1983), ‘Future Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Fossil Fuels’, in:Changing Climate, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1983 (National Research Council-National Academy of Sciences).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudd, Dale F., Gary J. Powers and Jeffrey J. Siirola (1973),Process Synthesis (Series: Prentice Hall International Series in the Physical & Chemical Engineering Sciences), Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs NJ (ISBN 0-13-723353-1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackleton, Robert et al. (1992),The Efficiency Value of Carbon Tax Revenues, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada (1969),The Input-Output Structure of the Canadian Economy 1967 I, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, Gunter (1989),Pollution Control, Economic Adjustment & Long-run Equilibrium: A Computable Equilibrium Approach to Environmental Economics, Berlin.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ayres, R.U. Thermodynamics and process analysis for future economic scenarios. Environ Resource Econ 6, 207–230 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705980

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705980

Key words

Navigation