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.
AlmonS. “The Distributed Lag Between Capital Appropriations and Expenditures.” Econometriea33 (January1964): 178-196.
2.
ChamberlainC. “Models of Gasoline Demand.” Report No. PR-SP.21, Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Mass., October1973.
3.
GriffinJ. M.Energy Conservation in the OECD: 1980 to 2000. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1979
4.
HouthakkerH. S.VerlegerP. K.SheehanD. P. “Dynamic Demand Analyses for Gasoline and Residential Electricity.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics (May1974): 412-418.
5.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association (MVMA). “MVMA Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures ’78.” Detroit, 1979.
6.
PelaezR. F. “U.S. Gasoline Demand: The Price Elasticity Issue.” Preliminary paper, March1980.
7.
SchmidtP.WaudR. “The Almon Technique and the Monetary Versus Fiscal Policy Debate.” JASA68 (March1973): 11-19.
8.
SweeneyJ. L. “The Demand for Gasoline: A Vintage Capital Model.” Stanford University mimeo, Department of Engineering-Economic Systems, Stanford, Calif., 1977.
