Cited by 12Vehicle emissions and performanceEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability

An assessment of two environmental and economic benefits of ‘Cash for Clunkers’

Lenski, Shoshannah M., Keoleian, Gregory A., Moore, Michael R.·2013·Ecological Economics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.10.011

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lenski, S. M., Keoleian, G. A., & Moore, M. R.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Keoleian, Gregory A.
Venue
Ecological Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-12
Volume
96
Pages
173-180
ISSN
0921-8009 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057876419
Cited by
12
References
33
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ecological Economics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Vehicle emissions and performance
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
Keywords
Cash for Clunkers, vehicle emissions, criteria pollutant emissions, CO2 emissions, consumer surplus, life cycle emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental policy evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review