On the Modeling of Key Structural Process of Energy Systems

Part of the SpringerBriefs in Complexity book series (BRIEFSCOMPLEXITY)


Armed with the fundamental understanding of feedback loop structures, now we will turn our attention to model and explain the dynamics of various accumulation and structural processes (i.e., stocks, flows, time delays, and nonlinearities) that are common to most of the energy systems planning and decision making situations. In this chapter, we will achieve such understanding with the help of stock and flow representations, structural representations and mathematical formulations, and behavioral outputs of various fundamental processes of energy systems including energy demand, policy incentives and inter-fuel substitution mechanism, manpower recruitment and training, energy production, and environmental emissions and CO2 tax.


Energy Policy Mitigation Cost Policy Incentive Electricity Intensity Manpower Planning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abada, I., Briat, V., & Massol, O. (2013). Construction of a fuel demand function portraying interfuel substitution, a system dynamics approach. Energy, 49(1), 240–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anand, S., Vrat, P., & Dahiya, R. (2005). Application of a system dynamics approach for Assessment and mitigation of CO2 emissions from the cement industry. Journal of Environmental Management, 79, 383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Feng., Y., Chen., Q., & Zhang, X. (2013). System dynamics modeling for urban energy consumption and CO2 emissions: A case study of Beijing-China. Ecological Modelling, 252, 44–52.Google Scholar
  4. Ford, A. (1996). System dynamics and the Electric Power Industry. System Dynamics Review, 13(1), 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Han, J., & Hayashi, Y. (2008). A system dynamics model of CO2 mitigation in China’s inter-city passenger transport. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 13(5), 298–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jin, W., Xu, L., & Yang, Z. (2009). Modeling a policy making framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating system dynamics into the ecological footprint. Ecological Economics, 68(12), 2938–2949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Moxnes, E. (1990). Interfuel substitution in OECD–European electricity production. System Dynamics Review 1990, 6(1), 44–65.Google Scholar
  8. Ontario Energy Board (OEB) (2002). Ontario’s System-Wide Electricity Supply Mix 2002. Accessed on July 22, 2015.
  9. Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2005). MDESRAP: a model for understanding the dynamics of electricity supply, resources and pollution. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 23(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  10. Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2013). Understanding the dynamics of electricity generation capacity in Canada: A system dynamics approach. Energy, 59, 285–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2014). Green power in Ontario: A dynamic model-based analysis. Energy, 77(1), 859–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2015). Independent power (or pollution) producers? Electricity reforms and IPPs in Pakistan. Energy, 83(1), 240–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Saeed, K. (2013). Managing the energy basket in the face of limits: A search for operational means to sustain energy supply and contain its environmental impact. In H. Qudrat-Ullah (Ed.), Energy policy modeling in the 21st Century (pp. 69–86). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Trappey, A., Trappey, Ch V, Gilbert, L., & Chang, Y. (2012). The analysis of renewable energy policies for the Taiwan Penghu island administrative region. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(1), 958–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.York UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations