IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v85y2015icp71-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Residual learning rates in lead-acid batteries: Effects on emerging technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Matteson, Schuyler
  • Williams, Eric

Abstract

The low price of lead-acid, the most popular battery, is often used in setting cost targets for emerging energy storage technologies. Future cost reductions in lead acid batteries could increase investment and time scales needed for emerging storage technologies to reach cost-parity. In this paper the first documented model of cost reductions for lead-acid batteries is developed. Regression to a standard experience curve using 1989–2012 data yield a poor fit, with R2 values of 0.17 for small batteries and 0.05 for larger systems. To address this problem, battery costs are separated into material and residual costs, and experience curves developed for residual costs. Depending on the year, residual costs account for 41–86% of total battery cost. Using running-time averages to address volatility in material costs, a 4-year time average experience curve for residual costs yield much higher R2, 0.78 for small and 0.74 for large lead-acid batteries. The learning rate for residual costs in lead-acid batteries is 20%, a discovery with policy implications. Neglecting to consider cost reductions in lead-acid batteries could result in failure of energy storage start-ups and public policy programs. Generalizing this result, learning in incumbent technologies must be understood to assess the potential of emerging ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteson, Schuyler & Williams, Eric, 2015. "Residual learning rates in lead-acid batteries: Effects on emerging technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 71-79.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:85:y:2015:i:c:p:71-79
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.05.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515002074
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.05.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    2. Díaz-González, Francisco & Sumper, Andreas & Gomis-Bellmunt, Oriol & Villafáfila-Robles, Roberto, 2012. "A review of energy storage technologies for wind power applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 2154-2171.
    3. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2007. "A centurial history of technological change and learning curves for pulverized coal-fired utility boilers," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1996-2005.
    4. Hadjipaschalis, Ioannis & Poullikkas, Andreas & Efthimiou, Venizelos, 2009. "Overview of current and future energy storage technologies for electric power applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1513-1522, August.
    5. Matteson, Schuyler & Williams, Eric, 2015. "Learning dependent subsidies for lithium-ion electric vehicle batteries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 322-331.
    6. McManus, M.C., 2012. "Environmental consequences of the use of batteries in low carbon systems: The impact of battery production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 288-295.
    7. van der Zwaan, Bob & Rabl, Ari, 2004. "The learning potential of photovoltaics: implications for energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(13), pages 1545-1554, September.
    8. McNerney, James & Doyne Farmer, J. & Trancik, Jessika E., 2011. "Historical costs of coal-fired electricity and implications for the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3042-3054, June.
    9. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    10. Junginger, M. & Faaij, A. & Turkenburg, W. C., 2005. "Global experience curves for wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 133-150, January.
    11. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E., 2007. "A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5630-5642, November.
    12. C. Harmon, 2000. "Experience Curves of Photovoltaic Technology," Working Papers ir00014, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    13. McKenna, Eoghan & McManus, Marcelle & Cooper, Sam & Thomson, Murray, 2013. "Economic and environmental impact of lead-acid batteries in grid-connected domestic PV systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 239-249.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. van Velzen, Arjan & Annema, Jan Anne & van de Kaa, Geerten & van Wee, Bert, 2019. "Proposing a more comprehensive future total cost of ownership estimation framework for electric vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1034-1046.
    2. Jaiswal, Abhishek, 2017. "Lithium-ion battery based renewable energy solution for off-grid electricity: A techno-economic analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 922-934.
    3. Rodrigues, E.M.G. & Godina, R. & Catalão, J.P.S., 2017. "Modelling electrochemical energy storage devices in insular power network applications supported on real data," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 315-329.
    4. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    5. Heuberger, Clara F. & Rubin, Edward S. & Staffell, Iain & Shah, Nilay & Mac Dowell, Niall, 2017. "Power capacity expansion planning considering endogenous technology cost learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 831-845.
    6. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    7. de Oliveira e Silva, Guilherme & Hendrick, Patrick, 2016. "Lead–acid batteries coupled with photovoltaics for increased electricity self-sufficiency in households," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 856-867.
    8. Renaldi, Renaldi & Hall, Richard & Jamasb, Tooraj & Roskilly, Anthony P., 2021. "Experience rates of low-carbon domestic heating technologies in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    9. Bustos, Cristian & Watts, David & Olivares, Daniel, 2019. "The evolution over time of Distributed Energy Resource’s penetration: A robust framework to assess the future impact of prosumage under different tariff designs," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    10. Thomassen, Gwenny & Van Passel, Steven & Dewulf, Jo, 2020. "A review on learning effects in prospective technology assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    11. Bustos, Cristian & Watts, David, 2017. "Novel methodology for microgrids in isolated communities: Electricity cost-coverage trade-off with 3-stage technology mix, dispatch & configuration optimizations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 204-221.
    12. Khan, Hassan Abbas & Ahmad, Husnain Fateh & Nasir, Mashood & Nadeem, Muhammad Fatiq & Zaffar, Nauman Ahmed, 2018. "Decentralised electric power delivery for rural electrification in Pakistan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 312-323.
    13. Carlos J. Sarasa-Maestro & Rodolfo Dufo-López & José L. Bernal-Agustín, 2016. "Analysis of Photovoltaic Self-Consumption Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Mengzhu Xiao & Manuel Wetzel & Thomas Pregger & Sonja Simon & Yvonne Scholz, 2020. "Modeling the Supply of Renewable Electricity to Metropolitan Regions in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-31, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    2. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    3. Reinhard Haas & Marlene Sayer & Amela Ajanovic & Hans Auer, 2023. "Technological learning: Lessons learned on energy technologies," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), March.
    4. Candelise, Chiara & Winskel, Mark & Gross, Robert J.K., 2013. "The dynamics of solar PV costs and prices as a challenge for technology forecasting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 96-107.
    5. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Interim monitoring of cost dynamics for publicly supported energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 825-835, March.
    6. Neij, Lena, 2008. "Cost development of future technologies for power generation--A study based on experience curves and complementary bottom-up assessments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 2200-2211, June.
    7. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    8. Tu, Qiang & Mo, Jianlei & Betz, Regina & Cui, Lianbiao & Fan, Ying & Liu, Yu, 2020. "Achieving grid parity of solar PV power in China- The role of Tradable Green Certificate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    9. Arthur van Benthem & Kenneth Gillingham & James Sweeney, 2008. "Learning-by-Doing and the Optimal Solar Policy in California," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 131-152.
    10. Hong, Sungjun & Chung, Yanghon & Woo, Chungwon, 2015. "Scenario analysis for estimating the learning rate of photovoltaic power generation based on learning curve theory in South Korea," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 80-89.
    11. Rout, Ullash K. & Blesl, Markus & Fahl, Ulrich & Remme, Uwe & Voß, Alfred, 2009. "Uncertainty in the learning rates of energy technologies: An experiment in a global multi-regional energy system model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4927-4942, November.
    12. Komendantova, Nadejda & Patt, Anthony & Williges, Keith, 2011. "Solar power investment in North Africa: Reducing perceived risks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4829-4835.
    13. Zhang, Da & Chai, Qimin & Zhang, Xiliang & He, Jiankun & Yue, Li & Dong, Xiufen & Wu, Shu, 2012. "Economical assessment of large-scale photovoltaic power development in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 370-375.
    14. Gan, Peck Yean & Li, ZhiDong, 2015. "Quantitative study on long term global solar photovoltaic market," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 88-99.
    15. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    16. Kavlak, Goksin & McNerney, James & Trancik, Jessika E., 2018. "Evaluating the causes of cost reduction in photovoltaic modules," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 700-710.
    17. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    18. Ferioli, F. & Schoots, K. & van der Zwaan, B.C.C., 2009. "Use and limitations of learning curves for energy technology policy: A component-learning hypothesis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2525-2535, July.
    19. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    20. Wu, X.D. & Yang, Q. & Chen, G.Q. & Hayat, T. & Alsaedi, A., 2016. "Progress and prospect of CCS in China: Using learning curve to assess the cost-viability of a 2×600MW retrofitted oxyfuel power plant as a case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1274-1285.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:85:y:2015:i:c:p:71-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.