Natural gas, like petrol, is also an essential good.

天然氣和汽油一樣，也是一種必不可少的商品。

But here, too, new research finds that consumers cut back when prices are higher.

但新的研究也發(fā)現(xiàn)，當天然氣價格上漲時，消費者會減少購買。

Maximilian Auffhammer of the University of California, Berkeley, and Edward Rubin of the University of Oregon looked at 300m energy bills in California.

加州大學伯克利分校的馬克西米利安·奧夫哈默和俄勒岡大學的愛德華·魯賓研究了加州3億的能源賬單。

In some parts of the golden state similar households are supplied by two different gas firms, which employ different price-adjustment mechanisms—providing the researchers with something akin to the treatment and control groups that are often used in medical research.

在這個黃金州的一些地區(qū)中，同類家庭的天然氣是由兩家不同公司供應的，這兩家公司采用的價格調(diào)整機制不同，為研究人員提供了類似于醫(yī)學研究中經(jīng)常使用的治療組和控制組的研究對象。

They established that a 10% rise in gas prices led to an average 2% drop in consumption.

他們證實，天然氣價格每上漲10%，消費量就會平均下降2%。

An interesting variation hid behind these figures.

這些數(shù)字背后隱藏著一個有趣的變化。

During summer months, there was hardly any response to prices; in winter, households cut use by 4%.

在夏季，人們對價格變化幾乎無動于衷；但在冬季，家庭的天然氣消耗量則會隨價格上漲下降4%。

California's price changes were small compared with those Europe is facing.

加州的價格變化與歐洲的相比可謂是小巫見大巫。

How households respond to enormous price shocks has rarely been studied, owing to a lack of real-world data.

由于缺乏真實數(shù)據(jù)，很少有人研究家庭是如何應對巨大價格沖擊的。

One exception is that produced by Ukraine, which Anna Alberini of the University of Maryland and co-authors have studied, looking at price rises in 2015 after subsidies were cut.

對烏克蘭的一項研究是一個例外，馬里蘭大學的安娜·阿爾貝里尼和其合著者研究了該國2015年削減補貼后的價格上漲情況。

They found that among households that did not invest in better heating or insulation a doubling of prices led to a 16% decline in consumption.

他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，價格翻倍上漲時，沒有買更好的取暖或隔熱材料的家庭的消費量會下降16%。

Policies to help households cope with high prices have also been studied—and the results are bad news for politicians capping prices.

他們還研究了幫助家庭應對高價格的政策--研究結(jié)果對限制價格的政客們來說是個壞消息。

In California, where a government programme cut the marginal price of gas for poor households by 20%, households raised their consumption by 8.5% over the next year to 18 months.

在加利福尼亞州，一項政府計劃將貧困家庭的天然氣邊際價格降低了20%，當?shù)丶彝サ奶烊粴庀M量在隨后的一年至一年半內(nèi)上升了8.5%。

Ukraine has found a better way to help.

烏克蘭已經(jīng)找到了一種更好的方式來幫助他們。

Households struggling to pay their bills can apply for a cash transfer.

那就是無力支付賬單的家庭可以申請現(xiàn)金轉(zhuǎn)移。

Since such a transfer is unrelated to consumption, it preserves the incentive for shorter showers, and thus does not blunt the effect of high prices on gas use.

由于這種轉(zhuǎn)移與消費無關，所以不會降低家庭縮短洗澡時間的積極性，因此也不會削弱高價格對天然氣消耗的影響。

Another option is a halfway house between a price cap and a transfer.

另一種選擇是設定價格上限和申請現(xiàn)金轉(zhuǎn)移之間的折中方案。

An Austrian state recently introduced a discount on the first 80% of a typical household's consumption, which means people retain an incentive to cut back on anything over that.

奧地利的一個州最近對普通家庭前80%的消費量實行了折扣，這意味著人們對于削減任何超過這一比例的消費仍然有積極性。

Households are not the only consumers of gas.

并非只有家庭會消耗天然氣。

Early in the war, manufacturers and agricultural producers argued against doing anything that might risk supplies, since production processes took time to alter and output losses could cascade through the economy.

在戰(zhàn)爭早期，由于生產(chǎn)過程的變化需要時間，再加上產(chǎn)出損失可能會影響整個經(jīng)濟，制造商和農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)者反對采取任何可能危及供應的行動。

But initial evidence from the German dairy and fertiliser industries suggests that even heavy users respond to higher prices.

但來自德國乳制品和化肥工業(yè)的初步證據(jù)表明，即使是重度消費者也會對價格上漲做出反應。

Farmers have switched from gas to oil heating; ammonia, fertiliser's gas-intensive ingredient, is now imported instead of being made locally.

農(nóng)民們已經(jīng)從使用天然氣改為使用石油取暖；化肥的天然氣密集型原料--氨現(xiàn)在也是用進口的，而不是本地生產(chǎn)的。

Over time, households and industry will adapt more to higher prices, meaning that with every passing month demand for gas will fall.

隨著時間的推移，家庭和工業(yè)會在更大程度上適應更高的價格，這意味著天然氣需求將逐月下降。

If Europe's politicians are serious about cutting gas use, they should heed the latest research and avoid price caps.

如果歐洲的政客們真的想減少天然氣消耗，他們應該聽從最新研究的建議，避免設定價格上限。

There is even a self-interested case for doing so.

這樣做甚至對他們自身有利。

Without high prices to encourage households and industry to cut back on their energy consumption, governments will have to find ways other than the price mechanism to allocate scarce resources.

因為如果沒有高價格來刺激家庭和工業(yè)減少能源消耗，政府將不得不尋找價格機制以外的方法來配置稀缺資源。

Who wants to be the politician to have introduced rationing?

誰會想要成為引入定量配給制度的政治家呢？