IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aen/journl/2009v30-04-a02.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand Subsidies Versus R&D: Comparing the Uncertain Impacts of Policy on a Pre-commercial Low-carbon Energy Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory F. Nemet
  • Erin Baker

Abstract

We combine an expert elicitation and a bottom-up manufacturing cost model to compare the effects of R&D and demand subsidies. We model their effects on the future costs of a low-carbon energy technology that is not currently commercially available, purely organic photovoltaics (PV). We find that: (1) successful R&D enables PV to achieve a cost target of 4c/kWh, (2) the cost of PV does not reach the target when only subsidies, and not R&D, are implemented, and (3) production-related effects on technological advanceÑlearning-by-doing and economies of scaleÑare not as critical to the long-term potential for cost reduction in organic PV than is the investment in and success of R&D. These results are insensitive to two levels of policy intensity, the level of a carbon price, the availability of storage technology, and uncertainty in the main parameters used in the model. However, a case can still be made for subsidies: comparisons of stochastic dominance show that subsidies provide a hedge against failure in the R&D program.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory F. Nemet & Erin Baker, 2009. "Demand Subsidies Versus R&D: Comparing the Uncertain Impacts of Policy on a Pre-commercial Low-carbon Energy Technology," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 49-80.
    • Handle: RePEc:aen:journl:2009v30-04-a02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iaee.org/en/publications/ejarticle.aspx?id=2337
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to IAEE members and subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert T. Clemen & Robert L. Winkler, 1999. "Combining Probability Distributions From Experts in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 187-203, April.
    2. Nikolaos Kouvaritakis & Antonio Soria & Stephane Isoard, 2000. "Modelling energy technology dynamics: methodology for adaptive expectations models with learning by doing and learning by searching," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(1/2/3/4), pages 104-115.
    3. Mark A. Moore & Anthony E. Boardman & Aidan R. Vining & David L. Weimer & David H. Greenberg, 2004. "“Just give me a number!” Practical values for the social discount rate," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4), pages 789-812.
    4. Miketa, Asami & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2004. "Experiments with a methodology to model the role of R&D expenditures in energy technology learning processes; first results," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(15), pages 1679-1692, October.
    5. Clarke, Leon & Weyant, John & Edmonds, Jae, 2008. "On the sources of technological change: What do the models assume," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 409-424, March.
    6. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 abatement policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 211-253, August.
    7. Popp, David, 2006. "ENTICE-BR: The effects of backstop technology R&D on climate policy models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 188-222, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Criqui, P. & Mima, S. & Menanteau, P. & Kitous, A., 2015. "Mitigation strategies and energy technology learning: An assessment with the POLES model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 119-136.
    2. Kahouli, Sondès, 2011. "Effects of technological learning and uranium price on nuclear cost: Preliminary insights from a multiple factors learning curve and uranium market modeling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 840-852, September.
    3. Popp, David & Santen, Nidhi & Fisher-Vanden, Karen & Webster, Mort, 2013. "Technology variation vs. R&D uncertainty: What matters most for energy patent success?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 505-533.
    4. Nidhi R. Santen & Mort D. Webster & David Popp & Ignacio Pérez-Arriaga, 2014. "Inter-temporal R&D and Capital Investment Portfolios for the Electricity Industry’s Low Carbon Future," NBER Working Papers 20783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Nidhi R. Santen & Mort D. Webster & David Popp & Ignacio Pérez-Arriaga, 2017. "Inter-temporal R&D and capital investment portfolios for the electricity industrys low carbon future," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    6. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    7. Takanobu Kosugi, 2010. "Assessments of ‘Greenhouse Insurance’: A Methodological Review," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 17(4), pages 345-363, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Nidhi R. Santen & Mort D. Webster & David Popp & Ignacio Pérez-Arriaga, 2014. "Inter-temporal R&D and Capital Investment Portfolios for the Electricity Industry's Low Carbon Future," CESifo Working Paper Series 5139, CESifo.
    10. Uyterlinde, Martine A. & Junginger, Martin & de Vries, Hage J. & Faaij, Andre P.C. & Turkenburg, Wim C., 2007. "Implications of technological learning on the prospects for renewable energy technologies in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4072-4087, August.
    11. Lindman, Åsa & Söderholm, Patrik, 2012. "Wind power learning rates: A conceptual review and meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 754-761.
    12. Mort Webster & Karen Fisher-Vanden & David Popp & Nidhi Santen, 2017. "Should We Give Up after Solyndra? Optimal Technology R&D Portfolios under Uncertainty," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 123-151.
    13. Santen, Nidhi R. & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2016. "Balancing solar PV deployment and RD&D: A comprehensive framework for managing innovation uncertainty in electricity technology investment planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 560-569.
    14. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    15. Tunç Durmaz & Fred Schroyen, 2020. "Evaluating Carbon Capture And Storage In A Climate Model With Endogenous Technical Change," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 1-47, February.
    16. Shiell, Leslie & Lyssenko, Nikita, 2014. "Climate policy and induced R&D: How great is the effect?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 279-294.
    17. Clarke, Leon & Weyant, John & Edmonds, Jae, 2008. "On the sources of technological change: What do the models assume," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 409-424, March.
    18. Lazkano, Itziar & Nøstbakken, Linda & Pelli, Martino, 2017. "From fossil fuels to renewables: The role of electricity storage," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 113-129.
    19. Lohwasser, Richard & Madlener, Reinhard, 2013. "Relating R&D and investment policies to CCS market diffusion through two-factor learning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 439-452.
    20. Richard S.J. Tol, 2018. "Energy and Climate," Working Paper Series 1618, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aen:journl:2009v30-04-a02. 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: David Williams (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaeeeea.html .

    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.