4.7 Article

The dynamics and elasticities on the US natural gas market. A Bayesian Structural VAR analysis

Journal

ENERGY ECONOMICS
Volume 103, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105526

Keywords

Natural gas market; Structural VAR; Impulse-response function; Bayesian inference

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Centre (Poland) [2020/39/B/HS4/00366]
  2. University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
  3. ERIA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the impact of structural shocks on the dynamics of the U.S. natural gas market, correctly estimating the short-term price elasticity of natural gas supply and demand. The results show that the price elasticity of supply is low, while the elasticity of demand is higher than the average estimate in the literature.
Natural gas is an important source of energy in the global economy, hence understanding the drivers of its prices is of significant interest for economic agents. This paper investigates the role of structural shocks for the dynamics of the U.S. natural gas market within the Bayesian Structural Vector Autoregression framework applied by Baumeister and Hamilton (2019a, AER), to the crude oil market. This approach provides clear intuition for the identification strategy and allows us to correctly estimate the short-term price elasticity of natural gas supply and demand. Our results indicate that the former is low, whereas the latter is higher than the average estimate in the literature. We also show that market specific demand shocks explain a dominant fraction of natural gas prices variability, while the contribution of supply, aggregate economic activity and inventory shocks is important only during specific market events such as the recent outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, we illustrate how changes in supply in the era of shale gas revolution contributed to the dynamics of natural gas prices.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available