IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v33y2011i4p619-631.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology interactions among low-carbon energy technologies: What can we learn from a large number of scenarios?

Author

Listed:
  • McJeon, Haewon C.
  • Clarke, Leon
  • Kyle, Page
  • Wise, Marshall
  • Hackbarth, Andrew
  • Bryant, Benjamin P.
  • Lempert, Robert J.

Abstract

Advanced low-carbon energy technologies can substantially reduce the cost of stabilizing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Understanding the interactions between these technologies and their impact on the costs of stabilization can help inform energy policy decisions. Many previous studies have addressed this challenge by exploring a small number of representative scenarios that represent particular combinations of future technology developments. This paper uses a combinatorial approach in which scenarios are created for all combinations of the technology development assumptions that underlie a smaller, representative set of scenarios. We estimate stabilization costs for 768 runs of the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM), based on 384 different combinations of assumptions about the future performance of technologies and two stabilization goals. Graphical depiction of the distribution of stabilization costs provides first-order insights about the full data set and individual technologies. We apply a formal scenario discovery method to obtain more nuanced insights about the combinations of technology assumptions most strongly associated with high-cost outcomes. Many of the fundamental insights from traditional representative scenario analysis still hold under this comprehensive combinatorial analysis. For example, the importance of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and the substitution effect among supply technologies are consistently demonstrated. The results also provide more clarity regarding insights not easily demonstrated through representative scenario analysis. For example, they show more clearly how certain supply technologies can provide a hedge against high stabilization costs, and that aggregate end-use efficiency improvements deliver relatively consistent stabilization cost reductions. Furthermore, the results indicate that a lack of CCS options combined with lower technological advances in the buildings sector or the transportation sector is the most powerful predictor of high-cost scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • McJeon, Haewon C. & Clarke, Leon & Kyle, Page & Wise, Marshall & Hackbarth, Andrew & Bryant, Benjamin P. & Lempert, Robert J., 2011. "Technology interactions among low-carbon energy technologies: What can we learn from a large number of scenarios?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 619-631, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:4:p:619-631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988310001866
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Baker, Erin & Chon, Haewon & Keisler, Jeffrey, 2009. "Advanced solar R&D: Combining economic analysis with expert elicitations to inform climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(Supplemen), pages 37-49.
    2. Robert J. Lempert & David G. Groves & Steven W. Popper & Steve C. Bankes, 2006. "A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 514-528, April.
    3. Son H. Kim, Jae Edmonds, Josh Lurz, Steven J. Smith, and Marshall Wise, 2006. "The objECTS Framework for integrated Assessment: Hybrid Modeling of Transportation," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 63-92.
    4. Blanford, Geoffrey J., 2009. "R&D investment strategy for climate change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(Supplemen), pages 27-36.
    5. Ottmar Edenhofer , Brigitte Knopf, Terry Barker, Lavinia Baumstark, Elie Bellevrat, Bertrand Chateau, Patrick Criqui, Morna Isaac, Alban Kitous, Socrates Kypreos, Marian Leimbach, Kai Lessmann, Bertra, 2010. "The Economics of Low Stabilization: Model Comparison of Mitigation Strategies and Costs," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I).
    6. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    7. Scott, Michael J. & Sands, Ronald D. & Edmonds, Jae & Liebetrau, Albert M. & Engel, David W., 1999. "Uncertainty in integrated assessment models: modeling with MiniCAM 1.0," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(14), pages 855-879, December.
    8. Richard G. Richels & Thomas F. Rutherford & Geoffrey J. Blanford & Leon Clarke, 2007. "Managing the transition to climate stabilization," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(5), pages 409-428, September.
    9. Steve Bankes, 1993. "Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 435-449, June.
    10. Pugh, Graham & Clarke, Leon & Marlay, Robert & Kyle, Page & Wise, Marshall & McJeon, Haewon & Chan, Gabriel, 2011. "Energy R&D portfolio analysis based on climate change mitigation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 634-643, July.
    11. Edmonds, Jae & Clarke, John & Dooley, James & Kim, Son H. & Smith, Steven J., 2004. "Stabilization of CO2 in a B2 world: insights on the roles of carbon capture and disposal, hydrogen, and transportation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 517-537, July.
    12. Gritsevskyi, Andrii & Nakicenovi, Nebojsa, 2000. "Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 907-921, November.
    13. J. M. Reilly & J. A. Edmonds & R. H. Gardner & A. L. Brenkerf, 1987. "Uncertainty Analysis of the IEA/ORAU CO2 Emissions Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 1-29.
    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. Erin Baker & Olaitan Olaleye & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2015. "Decision Frameworks and the Investment in R&D," Working Papers 2015.42, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Iyer, Gokul & Hultman, Nathan & Eom, Jiyong & McJeon, Haewon & Patel, Pralit & Clarke, Leon, 2015. "Diffusion of low-carbon technologies and the feasibility of long-term climate targets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 103-118.
    3. Scott, Michael J. & Daly, Don S. & Zhou, Yuyu & Rice, Jennie S. & Patel, Pralit L. & McJeon, Haewon C. & Page Kyle, G. & Kim, Son H. & Eom, Jiyong & Clarke, Leon E., 2014. "Evaluating sub-national building-energy efficiency policy options under uncertainty: Efficient sensitivity testing of alternative climate, technological, and socioeconomic futures in a regional integr," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 22-33.
    4. 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.
    5. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    6. Diaz Anadon, Laura & Bosetti, Valentina & Chan, Gabriel & Nemet, Gregory & Verdolini, Elena, 2014. "Energy Technology Expert Elicitations for Policy: Workshops, Modeling, and Meta-analysis," Working Paper Series rwp14-054, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Kurth, Margaret & Keisler, Jeffrey M. & Bates, Matthew E. & Bridges, Todd S. & Summers, Jeffrey & Linkov, Igor, 2017. "A portfolio decision analysis approach to support energy research and development resource allocation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 128-135.
    8. Olaleye, Olaitan & Baker, Erin, 2015. "Large scale scenario analysis of future low carbon energy options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 203-216.
    9. Giacomo Marangoni & Gauthier De Maere & Valentina Bosetti, 2017. "Optimal Clean Energy R&D Investments Under Uncertainty," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 256056, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    10. Baker, Erin & Solak, Senay, 2011. "Climate change and optimal energy technology R&D policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(2), pages 442-454, September.
    11. Barron, Robert & McJeon, Haewon, 2015. "The differential impact of low-carbon technologies on climate change mitigation cost under a range of socioeconomic and climate policy scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 264-274.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. Baker, Erin & Olaleye, Olaitan & Aleluia Reis, Lara, 2015. "Decision frameworks and the investment in R&D," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 275-285.
    15. Pablo Salas, 2013. "Literature Review of Energy-Economics Models, Regarding Technological Change and Uncertainty," 4CMR Working Paper Series 003, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economy, Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research.
    16. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Salo, Ahti, 2016. "Finding Common Ground when Experts Disagree: Belief Dominance over Portfolios of Alternatives," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 243147, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    17. Arun S. Malik & Stephen C. Smith, 2012. "Adaptation To Climate Change In Low-Income Countries: Lessons From Current Research And Needs From Future Research," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-22.
    18. Lennox, James A. & Witajewski-Baltvilks, Jan, 2017. "Directed technical change with capital-embodied technologies: Implications for climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 400-409.
    19. Lempert Robert J., 2014. "Embedding (some) benefit-cost concepts into decision support processes with deep uncertainty," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 487-514, December.
    20. Thomas D. Pol & Ekko C. Ierland & Silke Gabbert, 2017. "Economic analysis of adaptive strategies for flood risk management under climate change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 267-285, February.

    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:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:4:p:619-631. 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/eneco .

    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.