4.5 Article

Forecasting Natural Gas Production and Consumption in United States-Evidence from SARIMA and SARIMAX Models

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 14, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en14196021

关键词

SARIMA; SARIMAX; natural gas production and consumption; forecast

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research on forecasting the seasonality and growth trend of natural gas production and consumption has shown that applying the SARIMA-X model for monthly forecasts in the US can lead to increased production and consumption by 2025 using seasonal patterns. This method provides effective information for decision-makers in energy planning and sustainable energy policies.
Research on forecasting the seasonality and growth trend of natural gas (NG) production and consumption will help organize an analysis base for NG inspection and development, social issues, and allow industrials elements to operate effectively and reduce economic issues. In this situation, we handle a comparison structure on the application of different models in monthly NG production and consumption forecasting using the cross-correlation function and then analyze the association between exogenous variables. Moreover, the SARIMA-X model is tested for US monthly NG production and consumption prediction via the proposed method for the first time in the literature review in this study. The performance of that model has been compared with SARIMA (p, d, q) * (P, D, Q)(s). The results from RMSE and MAPE indicate that the superiority of the best model. By applying this method, the US monthly NG production and consumption is forecast until 2025. The success of the proposed method allows the use of seasonality patterns. If this seasonal approach continues, the United States' NG production (16%) and consumption (24%) are expected to increase by 2025. The results of this study provide effective information for decision-makers on NG production and consumption to be credible and to determine energy planning and future sustainable energy policies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据