IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201601010800005988.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Essays on the demand for ethanol in the United States: willingness to pay for E85

Author

Listed:
  • Liao, Kenneth

Abstract

This dissertation contains three studies that estimate the distribution of willingness to pay (WTP) for E85 as a substitute for E10 among flex motorists in the United States. The results are vital for estimating the demand for ethanol beyond the blend wall and for analysis of the Renewable Fuel Standard. The first study attempts to estimate the distribution of preference for E85 from data generated by a survey of E85 stations in Minnesota. The study uses an extensive sample of recent observations, but estimates of the WTP distribution vary substantially depending on model specification. The conclusion is that the data are not suitable to estimate the distribution of WTP for E85.The second and third studies collect primary data from E85 stations in different regions of the United States to more accurately estimate preferences for E85 and investigate locational differences. The studies obtain revealed-preference (RP) data from flex motorists refueling at E85 stations and stated-preference (SP) data from surveying the flex motorists and presenting hypothetical scenarios. The second study uses the RP data to estimate relative preferences for E85, and the third study incorporates the SP data to better capture the wide range of fuel-switching behavior.The estimation sample consists of about nine hundred flex motorists in six urban areas in the Midwest and California. The sample of flex motorists who refuel at E85 stations is endogenously stratified; the probability of a flex motorist appearing in the sample is correlated to the motorist's WTP for E85. The models apply corrective probability weights so estimates reflect the population and not the sample.The results show that a $0.10 increase in the E85-E10 price difference decreases the probability of motorists choosing E85 by about 2.5 percent, on average, and preferences are spread over a broad range of fuel prices. In general, motorists are willing to pay more for E85 in California than in the Midwest, and when E85 and E10 are priced equally on a cost-per-mile basis, about 25 percent of flex motorists choose E85 in the Midwest compared to 75 percent in California.

Suggested Citation

  • Liao, Kenneth, 2016. "Essays on the demand for ethanol in the United States: willingness to pay for E85," ISU General Staff Papers 201601010800005988, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201601010800005988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/22daf769-511e-4bd8-b3fa-b7186a6cecb2/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Soren T., 2012. "The demand for ethanol as a gasoline substitute," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 151-168.
    2. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Cai, Zhen & Mohebalian, Phillip & Thompson, Wyatt, 2015. "Exploring the drivers' side of the “blend wall”: U.S. consumer preferences for ethanol blend fuels," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 217-226.
    3. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liao, Kenneth & Pouliot, Sébastien, 2016. "Estimates of the Demand for E85 Using Stated-Preference Data off Revealed-Preference Choices," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236107, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Sébastien Pouliot & Kenneth A Liao & Bruce A Babcock, 2018. "Estimating Willingness to Pay for E85 in the United States Using an Intercept Survey of Flex Motorists," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(5), pages 1486-1509.
    3. Pouliot, Sébastien & Babcock, Bruce A., 2017. "Feasibility of meeting increased biofuel mandates with E85," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 194-200.
    4. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    5. Martin Van Bueren & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32, March.
    6. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, March.
    8. Michelsen, Carl Christian & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Switching from fossil fuel to renewables in residential heating systems: An empirical study of homeowners' decisions in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 95-105.
    9. Stefano Ceolotto & Eleanor Denny, 2021. "Putting a new 'spin' on energy labels: measuring the impact of reframing energy efficiency on tumble dryer choices in a multi-country experiment," Trinity Economics Papers tep1521, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    10. Veeman, Michele M. & Unterschultz, James R., 2000. "Pork Market Development Research Project: Market Potential For Alberta'S Pork In Selected U.S. Markets," Project Report Series 24054, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    11. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    12. Tabi, Andrea & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2014. "What makes people seal the green power deal? — Customer segmentation based on choice experiment in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 206-215.
    13. Scheitrum, Daniel, 2017. "Renewable Natural Gas as a Solution to Climate Goals: Response to California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard," MPRA Paper 77193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chang, Jae Bong & Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2009. "Health Concerns and Consumer Preferences for Soy Foods: Choice Modeling Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49591, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    16. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Christina Korting & Harry de Gorter & David R Just, 2019. "Who Will Pay for Increasing Biofuel Mandates? Incidence of the Renewable Fuel Standard Given a Binding Blend Wall," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(2), pages 492-506.
    18. Cooper, Joseph C., 1997. "Combining Actual And Contingent Behavior Data To Model Farmer Adoption Of Water Quality Protection Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 1-14, July.
    19. List John A. & Sinha Paramita & Taylor Michael H., 2006. "Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-39, January.
    20. Anowar, Sabreena & Eluru, Naveen & Hatzopoulou, Marianne, 2017. "Quantifying the value of a clean ride: How far would you bicycle to avoid exposure to traffic-related air pollution?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 66-78.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201601010800005988. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.