Economic Cycles and the Responsiveness of Natural Gas Demand in China’s Residential Sector

About the Project The workshop series Drivers of Transportation Fuel Demand provides a forum for discussing key sustainability issues in transportation and current policy strategies to address them. In particular, much emphasis is placed on the adoption of fuelefficient and alternative-fuel vehicles for road transportation, innovation in fuel and vehicle technology mixes and the shift from road to other modes of transportation.Key PointsThe working assumption of most policymakers and automakers is that light-duty vehicle buyers either undervalue fuel economy or behave as if they do – perhaps because of the complexity in evaluating discounted fuel cost savings. If one accepts this argument then huge benefits can be gained from public policies that mandate fuel-efficient mobility through performance standards. Increasing vehicle fuel economy at the expense of performance has an opportunity cost for consumers as they value performance more than fuel economy. However, it remains an open question as to whether public policy, such as fuel economy standards, should incorporate opportunity costs arising from consumers’ tendency to maximize personal over societal benefit. Consumer concerns over the adoption of high fuel economy plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) centers around driving range, recharging time, charging infrastructure, value for money and highway performance, which continue to be major barriers. Evidence suggests that awareness and knowledge about PEVs have not yet increased substantially in many consumer segments. Finding better ways for consumers to gain firsthand experience with PEVs may help overcome this knowledge shortfall. Short-term incentives to induce PEV sales are expensive; more than $50,000 per incremental vehicle sold according to some estimates. There is scope to improve cost-effectiveness by developing a targeted incentive structure. Alternatively, devoting resources to technology development rather than deployment might represent a more cost-effective policy approach. Shared use of automated electric vehicles represents one possible path for achieving deep decarbonization, but its cost-effectiveness versus alternative paths has yet to be confirmed. PEVs seem unlikely to succeed if they are just a decarbonized replacement for today’s vehicles, but this can be achieved if they provide a better customer experience at a lower price point.

关于本项目，运输燃料需求驱动因素研讨会系列为讨论交通运输领域的关键可持续性问题以及应对这些问题的现行政策策略提供了一个平台。特别是，对推广燃油效率高和替代燃料的路面交通工具、燃料及车辆技术组合的创新以及从路面交通向其他交通方式的转变给予了高度重视。重点内容：大多数政策制定者和汽车制造商的工作假设是，轻型汽车买家要么低估了燃油经济性，要么表现得如同如此——或许是因为评估折扣燃料成本节省的复杂性。如果接受这一论点，那么通过强制执行性能标准来实现燃料效率的公共政策将带来巨大的益处。以牺牲性能为代价提高车辆燃油经济性对消费者而言存在机会成本，因为他们更重视性能而非燃油经济性。然而，是否应该将来自消费者倾向于最大化个人而非社会利益的潜在机会成本纳入公共政策，如燃油经济性标准，仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。消费者对高燃油经济性插电式电动汽车（PEV）的采用担忧主要集中在驾驶里程、充电时间、充电基础设施、性价比和高速公路性能等方面，这些因素仍然是主要的障碍。证据表明，许多消费者群体对PEV的认知和知识尚未显著增加。为消费者提供更好的途径以获得PEV的亲身体验可能有助于克服这一知识缺口。诱导PEV销售的短期激励措施成本高昂；据估计，每增加一辆销售的车辆成本超过50,000美元。通过开发有针对性的激励结构来提高成本效益是有空间的。或者，将资源投入到技术研发而非部署可能代表了一种更有效的政策途径。共享使用自动化电动汽车代表了一条实现深度脱碳的可能途径，但其成本效益与其他途径相比尚未得到证实。如果PEV仅仅是作为现有车辆的脱碳替代品，那么它们似乎不太可能成功，但如果它们在更低的价格点上提供更好的客户体验，这一目标是可以实现的。