IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/fcnwpa/2014_022.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro‐Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners

Author

Listed:
  • Oberst, Christian

    (E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN))

  • Madlener, Reinhard

    (E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN))

Abstract

This paper investigates the preferences of homeowners in Germany regarding the adoption of renewable energy‐based micro‐generation technologies using data from a survey with a discrete choice experiment. In the German policy debate, private households, in their possible joint roles as electricity producers and consumers, are discussed as potential key actors for the transition of the energy system towards a decentralized energy market based on renewable energies. In our study, we address the relevance of investment and usage characteristics as well as the perceived importance of both private and social costs and benefits behind prosumer preferences for the adoption of generic electricity micro‐generation technologies. The empirical investigation is based on a conditional logit model. The results show the perceived usefulness of electricity self‐supply, indicating that the motivation for electricity "prosuming" is about more than just using green electricity and undertaking a profitable (energy) investment. Policy makers should not rely on the intrinsic motivation of households to contribute towards climate protection but instead take social effects more strongly into account in their policies which aim to foster the energy system transition (“Energiewende”). Further, both energy policies and business models should avoid the introduction of overly complex measures which might be too demanding on households.

Suggested Citation

  • Oberst, Christian & Madlener, Reinhard, 2015. "Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro‐Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners," FCN Working Papers 22/2014, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:fcnwpa:2014_022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.fcn.eonerc.rwth-aachen.de/global/show_document.asp?id=aaaaaaaaaaoqwnx
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frondel, Manuel & Ritter, Nolan & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Vance, Colin, 2010. "Economic impacts from the promotion of renewable energy technologies: The German experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4048-4056, August.
    2. Schlör, Holger & Fischer, Wolfgang & Hake, Jürgen-Friedrich, 2013. "Sustainable development, justice and the Atkinson index: Measuring the distributional effects of the German energy transition," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 1493-1499.
    3. Galassi, Veronica & Madlener, Reinhard, 2014. "Identifying Business Models for Photovoltaic Systems with Storage in the Italian Market: A Discrete Choice Experiment," FCN Working Papers 19/2014, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    4. Mahapatra, Krushna & Gustavsson, Leif, 2008. "An adopter-centric approach to analyze the diffusion patterns of innovative residential heating systems in Sweden," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 577-590, February.
    5. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    6. Farsi, Mehdi, 2010. "Risk aversion and willingness to pay for energy efficient systems in rental apartments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3078-3088, June.
    7. Achtnicht, Martin, 2011. "Do environmental benefits matter? Evidence from a choice experiment among house owners in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2191-2200, September.
    8. Grösche, Peter & Schröder, Carsten, 2011. "Eliciting public support for greening the electricity mix using random parameter techniques," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 363-370, March.
    9. William S. Breffle & Robert D. Rowe, 2002. "Comparing Choice Question Formats for Evaluating Natural Resource Tradeoffs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 298-314.
    10. Pegels, Anna & Lütkenhorst, Wilfried, 2014. "Is Germany׳s energy transition a case of successful green industrial policy? Contrasting wind and solar PV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 522-534.
    11. Bergmann, Ariel & Hanley, Nick & Wright, Robert, 2006. "Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1004-1014, June.
    12. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Discounting the distant future: how much do uncertain rates increase valuations?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 52-71, July.
    13. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    14. Fu, Tsu-Tan & Lin, Yih-Ming & Huang, Chung L., 2011. "Willingness to pay for obesity prevention," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 316-324, July.
    15. Borchers, Allison M. & Duke, Joshua M. & Parsons, George R., 2007. "Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3327-3334, June.
    16. Kwak, So-Yoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon & Kwak, Seung-Jun, 2010. "Valuing energy-saving measures in residential buildings: A choice experiment study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 673-677, January.
    17. Longo, Alberto & Markandya, Anil & Petrucci, Marta, 2008. "The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: Willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 140-152, August.
    18. Ku, Se-Ju & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2010. "Willingness to pay for renewable energy investment in Korea: A choice experiment study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(8), pages 2196-2201, October.
    19. Rosen, Christiane & Madlener, Reinhard, 2012. "Auction Design for Local Reserve Energy Markets," FCN Working Papers 7/2012, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN), revised Mar 2013.
    20. Balcombe, Paul & Rigby, Dan & Azapagic, Adisa, 2013. "Motivations and barriers associated with adopting microgeneration energy technologies in the UK," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 655-666.
    21. Cansino, José M. & Pablo-Romero, María del P. & Román, Rocío & Yñiguez, Rocío, 2010. "Tax incentives to promote green electricity: An overview of EU-27 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6000-6008, October.
    22. Amador, Francisco Javier & González, Rosa Marina & Ramos-Real, Francisco Javier, 2013. "Supplier choice and WTP for electricity attributes in an emerging market: The role of perceived past experience, environmental concern and energy saving behavior," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 953-966.
    23. Roland Menges & Stefan Traub, 2009. "An Experimental Study on the Gap between Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Donate for Green Electricity," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 65(3), pages 335-357, September.
    24. Leenheer, Jorna & de Nooij, Michiel & Sheikh, Omer, 2011. "Own power: Motives of having electricity without the energy company," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5621-5629, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oberst, Christian A. & Schmitz, Hendrik & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "Are Prosumer Households That Much Different? Evidence From Stated Residential Energy Consumption in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 101-115.
    2. Specht, Jan Martin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2018. "Business Models for Energy Suppliers Aggregating Flexible Distributed Assets and Policy Issues Raised," FCN Working Papers 7/2018, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    3. repec:lib:000cis:v:8:y:2020:i:1:p:1-16 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Christiane Rosen and Reinhard Madlener, 2016. "Regulatory Options for Local Reserve Energy Markets: Implications for Prosumers, Utilities, and other Stakeholders," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Bollino-M).
    5. Markus Flaute & Anett Gro mann & Christian Lutz & Anne Nieters, 2017. "Macroeconomic Effects of Prosumer Households in Germany," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(1), pages 146-155.
    6. Priessner, Alfons & Hampl, Nina, 2020. "Can product bundling increase the joint adoption of electric vehicles, solar panels and battery storage? Explorative evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Wolf-Peter Schill, Alexander Zerrahn, and Friedrich Kunz, 2017. "Prosumage of solar electricity: pros, cons, and the system perspective," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    8. Poier, Stefan, 2023. "A matter of risk? Investigating the battery purchase decision in the German photovoltaics market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    9. Hackbarth, André, 2018. "Attitudes, preferences, and intentions of German households concerning participation in peer-to-peer electricity trading," Reutlingen Working Papers on Marketing & Management 2019-2, Reutlingen University, ESB Business School.
    10. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis & Ilona Alisauskaite-Seskiene & Gintare Stankuniene & Zaneta Simanaviciene, 2019. "A Review of Willingness to Pay Studies for Climate Change Mitigation in the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-38, April.
    11. Ecker, Franz & Spada, Hans & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2018. "Independence without control: Autarky outperforms autonomy benefits in the adoption of private energy storage systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 214-228.
    12. Specht, Jan Martin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "Energy Supplier 2.0: A conceptual business model for energy suppliers aggregating flexible distributed assets and policy issues raised," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).

    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. Christian A. Oberst & Reinhard Madlener, 2015. "Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro†Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners," Working Papers 2015.07, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    2. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    3. Carsten Herbes & Lorenz Braun & Dennis Rube, 2016. "Pricing of Biomethane Products Targeted at Private Households in Germany—Product Attributes and Providers’ Pricing Strategies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Stefania Troiano & Daniel Vecchiato & Francesco Marangon & Tiziano Tempesta & Federico Nassivera, 2019. "Households’ Preferences for a New ‘Climate-Friendly’ Heating System: Does Contribution to Reducing Greenhouse Gases Matter?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Amador, Francisco Javier & González, Rosa Marina & Ramos-Real, Francisco Javier, 2013. "Supplier choice and WTP for electricity attributes in an emerging market: The role of perceived past experience, environmental concern and energy saving behavior," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 953-966.
    7. Vecchiato, Daniel & Tempesta, Tiziano, 2015. "Public preferences for electricity contracts including renewable energy: A marketing analysis with choice experiments," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 168-179.
    8. Martínez-Cruz, Adán L. & Núñez, Héctor M., 2021. "Tension in Mexico's energy transition: Are urban residential consumers in Aguascalientes willing to pay for renewable energy and green jobs?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    9. Ju-Hee Kim & Younggew Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2021. "Using a choice experiment to explore the public willingness to pay for the impacts of improving energy efficiency of an apartment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1775-1793, October.
    10. Anders Dugstad & Kristine Grimsrud & Gorm Kipperberg & Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2020. "Scope elasticity and economic significance in discrete choice experiments," Discussion Papers 942, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    11. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    12. Collins, Matthew & Curtis, John, 2016. "Willingness-to-Pay and Free-Riding in a National Energy Efficiency Retrofit Grant Scheme: A Revealed Preference Approach," Papers WP551, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    13. Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2012. "A social marketing mix for renewable energy in Europe based on consumer stated preference surveys," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 30-39.
    14. Abdullah, Sabah & Mariel, Petr, 2010. "Choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to improve electricity services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4570-4581, August.
    15. Herbes, Carsten & Friege, Christian & Baldo, Davide & Mueller, Kai-Markus, 2015. "Willingness to pay lip service? Applying a neuroscience-based method to WTP for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 562-572.
    16. Anabela Botelho & Lina Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2018. "Discrete-choice experiments valuing local environmental impacts of renewables: two approaches to a case study in Portugal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 145-162, December.
    17. Susaeta, Andres & Lal, Pankaj & Alavalapati, Janaki & Mercer, Evan, 2011. "Random preferences towards bioenergy environmental externalities: A case study of woody biomass based electricity in the Southern United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1111-1118.
    18. Scarpa, Riccardo & Willis, Ken, 2010. "Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: Primary and discretionary choice of British households' for micro-generation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 129-136, January.
    19. Bao, Qifang & Sinitskaya, Ekaterina & Gomez, Kelley J. & MacDonald, Erin F. & Yang, Maria C., 2020. "A human-centered design approach to evaluating factors in residential solar PV adoption: A survey of homeowners in California and Massachusetts," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 503-513.
    20. Bae, Jeong Hwan & Rishi, Meenakshi, 2018. "Increasing consumer participation rates for green pricing programs: A choice experiment for South Korea," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 490-502.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Prosumer; micro‐generation technologies; choice experiment; renewable energy; energy transition; policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General

    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:ris:fcnwpa:2014_022. 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: Hendrik Schmitz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fceonde.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.