Decision-aiding Algorithms

  • Thomas Stanton
Part of the Policy Studies Organization Series book series (PSOS)

Abstract

Utility companies — and the public utility commissions regulating them — make technology selections where multiple criteria must be considered. In the past, utilities often ignored environmental and other externalities, selecting resources which, in effect, “assign[ed] the residual … externality costs a value of zero” (Ottinger, 1990, p. 15).

Keywords

Combustion Transportation Ozone Radon Archeological Site 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bernow, Stephen S. and Donald B. Marron, (1990), Valuation of Environmental Externalities for Energy Planning and Operations (Boston, MA: Tellus Institute).Google Scholar
  2. Brick, Steve (1990), Transcript: Michigan Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Externalities Work Group (Lansing, MI: Council on Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Public Health).Google Scholar
  3. Brick, Steve and George Edgar (1990), “Blunting Risk with Caution in Planning”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, pp. 56–63 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchanan, Shepard C. (1990), “Estimating Environmental Costs”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, 36–41 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burkhart, Lori A. (1989), “External Social Costs as a Factor in Least-Cost Planning — an Emerging Concept”, Public Utilities Fortnightly, 43–5 (August 31).Google Scholar
  6. California Collaborative (1990), Report of the Statewide Collaborative Process: an Energy Efficiency Blueprint for California (San Francisco: California Energy Commission).Google Scholar
  7. Chernick, Paul (1990), A Brief Introduction to the Estimation of the Value of Environmental Externalities (Boston, MA: PLC, Inc).Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, Samuel D., Joseph H. Eto, C. Goldman, John Beldock and Geoff Crandall, (1990a). A Survey of State Public Utility Commission Activities to Incorporate Environmental Externalities into Electric Utility Planning and Regulation (Berkeley, CA: Utility Planning and Policy Group, Energy Analysis Program, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories, LBL-28616).Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, S., J. Eto, C. Goldman, J. Beldock and G. Crandall (1990b), “What States are Doing About Externalities”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, 24–30, 32, 35 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coursey, David H. and R. F. Shangraw Jr. (1989), “Expert System Technology for Managerial Applications: a Typology”, Public Productivity Review, vl2, n3, 237–62 (Spring).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dairyland Power Cooperative (1990), Dairy land Power Cooperative Externalities Worksheet: Draft (LaCrosse, WI: Dairyland Power Cooperative).Google Scholar
  12. EPRI (1988), Demand-Side Planning Program: Projects and Products 1974–1987 (Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute, EM-5917-SR).Google Scholar
  13. Foley, L. O. and A. D. Lee (1990), “A Selective Look at Current Practice”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, 48–55 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gentleman, Mary Beth (1989), “Integration of Externalities in Resource Procurement Processes in Massachusetts and New York”, Proceedings: NARUC Least-Cost Utility Planning Conference, Charleston, South Carolina, September 10, 1989 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy) (in press).Google Scholar
  15. Kushler, Martin, (1990), Graph: Comparison of DSM Expenditures for Michigan Utilities (Lansing, MI: Michigan Public Service Commission, Planning, Forecasting and Evaluation Division).Google Scholar
  16. Laitner, Skip and Jack Kegel (1988), “Community Energy Choices: the Goal Programming Concept as an Economic Development Assessment Tool for Utility/Community-Based Energy Management Programs”, Sixth Annual Conference of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (Washington, D.C.: NARUC).Google Scholar
  17. Laitner, Skip and Jack Kegel (1989), “Evaluating Community Energy Management Strategies Using the Options Model”, 1989 Conference on Energy Program Evaluation: Conservation and Resource Management (Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, 407–11).Google Scholar
  18. Lee, Sang M., Skip Laitner and Yung M. Yu, (1986), A Goal Programming Model for Community Energy Management Strategies (Honolulu, Hawaii: Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute).Google Scholar
  19. Madison Gas & Electric. (May 23, 1990). Valuing “External” Benefits in the Integrated Planning Process. Madison, WI: Madison Gas & Electric.Google Scholar
  20. McKenna, Christopher K. (1980) Quantitative Methods for Public Decision Making. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  21. MEOS. (1987). Environmental Impacts of Electricity Generating Options: a Methodology for Incorporating Site-specific Information. Lansing, MI: Michigan Public Service Commission, Michigan Electricity Options Study, Environmental Assessment Module.Google Scholar
  22. Moskovitz, David. (November, 1989). Profits & Progress Through Least-Cost Planning. Washington, D.C.: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.Google Scholar
  23. MPSC. (June 28, 1987). Opinion and Order in Case Number U-8528. Lansing, MI: Michigan Public Service Commission.Google Scholar
  24. Nagel, Stuart S. (ed.) (1986), Microcomputers, Evaluation Problems, and Policy Analysis (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage).Google Scholar
  25. Nagel, Stuart S. (1987a). Evaluation Analysis with Microcomputers (Champaign, IL: University of Illinois).Google Scholar
  26. Nagel, Stuart S. (1987b), “Evaluation Analysis with Microcomputers”, Public Productivity Review, n42, 67–80 (Summer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. NARUC (1988), Resolution in Support of Incentives for Electric Utility Least-Cost Planning (Washington, D.C.: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).Google Scholar
  28. NARUC, Energy Conservation Committee (1988a), Least-Cost Utility Planning: a Handbook for Public Utility Commissioners, Volume 1 (Washington, D.C.: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).Google Scholar
  29. NARUC, Energy Conservation Committee (1988b), Least-Cost Utility Planning: a Handbook for Public Utility Commissioners, Volume 2: The Demand-Side: Conceptual and Methodological Issues (Washington, D.C.: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).Google Scholar
  30. Newman, Paul (1990), Summary of Wisconsin Utility DSM Expenditures (Madison, WI: Wisconsin Public Service Commission, Planning Division).Google Scholar
  31. Northern States Power Company (1990), Non-Quantifiable Risk Assessment Worksheet (Eau Claire, WI: Northern States Power Company).Google Scholar
  32. Ottinger, Richard L. (1990), “The True Cost of Electric Power”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, 14–23 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Porter, Derek (1990), Consideration of Externalities in Least Cost Planning (Madison, WI: Wisconsin Power and Light Company).Google Scholar
  34. Putta, Sury N. (1989), Competition in Electric Generation — Environmental Externalities (Albany, NY: New York State Department of Public Service).Google Scholar
  35. Putta, Sury (1990), “Valuing Externalities in Bidding in New York”, The Electricity Journal, v3, n6, 42–7 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Reilly, William Kane (1990) “The New Environmentalism”, speech at The Economic Club of Detroit, April 30.Google Scholar
  37. Stanton, Thomas S. (1988), “Least Cost Utility Planning: Analyzing Multiple Objectives Using Management Science Decision Support Tools”, National Conference on Least Cost Utility Planning, Aspen, Colorado (Washington, D.C.: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).Google Scholar
  38. Stanton, Thomas S. (1989a), “Energy Program Evaluation Using P/G% Decision-Aiding Software”, 1989 Conference on Energy Program Evaluation: Conservation and Resource Management (Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy) 413–18.Google Scholar
  39. Stanton, Thomas, S. (1989b), “Application of LCUP Software Models: a Practitioner’s Pragmatic Prerequisites”, Proceedings: NARUC Least-Cost Utility Planning Conference, Charleston, South Carolina (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy) (in press).Google Scholar
  40. Stone & Webster (1989), Methods to Integrate Demand and Supply Options and Evaluation of Least Cost Planning Models (Englewood, CO: Stone & Webster Management Consultants, Inc., DE-FG01-87CE27487).Google Scholar
  41. Talhelm, Daniel R. and Eric J. Fitch (1987), Task Report 3: Due Consideration of the Environment (Lansing, MI: Michigan Public Service Commission, Michigan Electricity Options Study, Environmental Assessment Module).Google Scholar
  42. Temple, Barker, & Sloane, Inc. (1989), Integrating Environmental Externalities into Resource Planning at New England Electric.Google Scholar
  43. U.S. EPA. (1989), National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program Emissions Inventory.Google Scholar
  44. Vine, Edward and Jeffrey Harris (1989), “Evaluating Energy and Non-Energy Impacts of Energy Conservation Programs: a Supply Curve Framework of Analysis”, 1989 Conference on Energy Program Evaluation: Conservation and Resource Management (Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy) 397–405.Google Scholar
  45. Wisconsin Power and Light Company (1990), Method of Incorporating Externalities into Integrated Resource Planning (Madison, WI: Wisconsin Power and Light Company).Google Scholar
  46. Wisconsin Public Service Commission (1989), Re Advance Plans for Construction of Facilities, 102 Public Utility Reports Quarterly 245.Google Scholar
  47. Woichik, Eric C. (1989), “Environmental Premia and Multi-Attribute Bidding: Requisites for Socially Efficient Resource Selection?”, Proceedings: NARUC Least-Cost Utility Planning Conference, Charleston, South Carolina, September 10, 1989 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy) (in press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Policy Studies Organization 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Stanton
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public Affairs and AdministrationWestern Michigan UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations