IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v101y2019icp440-452.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review of modelling energy transitions pathways with application to energy system flexibility

Author

Listed:
  • Bolwig, Simon
  • Bazbauers, Gatis
  • Klitkou, Antje
  • Lund, Peter D.
  • Blumberga, Andra
  • Gravelsins, Armands
  • Blumberga, Dagnija

Abstract

The aim of this review is to discuss how quantitative modelling of energy scenarios for sustainable energy transition pathways can be made more realistic by taking into account insights from the socio-technical and related literatures. The proposition is that an enriched modelling approach would focus not just on technology development and deployment, but also on feedback loops, learning processes, policy and governance, behavioural changes, the interlinkages between the energy sector and other economic sectors, and infrastructure development. The review discusses a range of socio-technical concepts with a view to how they can enrich the understanding and modelling of highly complex dynamic systems such as flexible energy systems with high shares of variable renewable energy. In this context, application of system dynamics modelling (SDM) for the analysis of energy transitions is also introduced by describing the differences between SDM and a traditional modelling approach that uses econometric and linear programming methods. A conceptual framework for this type of modelling is provided by using causal loop diagrams. The diagrams illustrate the endogenous approach of SDM – understanding and modelling the structure of a system, which is responsible for its dynamic behaviour. SDM can also capture the co-evolution of economic, policy, technology, and behavioural factors over sufficiently long time periods, which is necessary for the analysis of transition pathway dynamics. In this regard, the review summarises how socio-technical concepts can be approached in SDM and why they are relevant for the analysis of flexibility in energy systems. From a computational point of view, it could be beneficial to combine SDM with technologically detailed energy system optimization models and that could be a way forward for achieving more realistic, non-linear quantitative modelling of sustainable energy transitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bolwig, Simon & Bazbauers, Gatis & Klitkou, Antje & Lund, Peter D. & Blumberga, Andra & Gravelsins, Armands & Blumberga, Dagnija, 2019. "Review of modelling energy transitions pathways with application to energy system flexibility," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 440-452.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:101:y:2019:i:c:p:440-452
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032118307718
    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. Jonaitis, Audrius & Gudzius, Saulius & Morkvenas, Alfonsas & Azubalis, Mindaugas & Konstantinaviciute, Inga & Baranauskas, Audrius & Ticka, Vidmantas, 2018. "Challenges of integrating wind power plants into the electric power system: Lithuanian case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 468-475.
    2. Cruz, Marco R.M. & Fitiwi, Desta Z. & Santos, Sérgio F. & Catalão, João P.S., 2018. "A comprehensive survey of flexibility options for supporting the low-carbon energy future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 338-353.
    3. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    4. Abdin, Islam F. & Zio, Enrico, 2018. "An integrated framework for operational flexibility assessment in multi-period power system planning with renewable energy production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 898-914.
    5. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    6. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    7. Andrea Herbst & Felipe Andrés Toro & Felix Reitze & Eberhard Jochem, 2012. "Introduction to Energy Systems Modelling," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 148(II), pages 111-135, June.
    8. Chesser, Michael & Hanly, Jim & Cassells, Damien & Apergis, Nicholas, 2018. "The positive feedback cycle in the electricity market: Residential solar PV adoption, electricity demand and prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 36-44.
    9. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    10. Yamani Douzi Sorkhabi, Sami & Romero, David A. & Yan, Gary Kai & Gu, Michelle Dao & Moran, Joaquin & Morgenroth, Michael & Amon, Cristina H., 2016. "The impact of land use constraints in multi-objective energy-noise wind farm layout optimization," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 359-370.
    11. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    12. Zakeri, Behnam & Syri, Sanna & Rinne, Samuli, 2015. "Higher renewable energy integration into the existing energy system of Finland – Is there any maximum limit?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(P3), pages 244-259.
    13. Delucchi, Mark A. & Jacobson, Mark Z., 2011. "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1170-1190, March.
    14. Palm, Jenny, 2018. "Household installation of solar panels – Motives and barriers in a 10-year perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-8.
    15. Li, Francis G.N. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Strachan, Neil, 2015. "A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 290-305.
    16. James Meadowcroft, 2009. "What about the politics? Sustainable development, transition management, and long term energy transitions," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 323-340, November.
    17. Ringler, Philipp & Keles, Dogan & Fichtner, Wolf, 2016. "Agent-based modelling and simulation of smart electricity grids and markets – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 205-215.
    18. Antje Klitkou & Aris Kaloudis, 2007. "Scientific versus economic specialisation of business R&D — the case of Norway," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 283-298, December.
    19. Child, Michael & Koskinen, Otto & Linnanen, Lassi & Breyer, Christian, 2018. "Sustainability guardrails for energy scenarios of the global energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 321-334.
    20. Bale, Catherine S.E. & Varga, Liz & Foxon, Timothy J., 2015. "Energy and complexity: New ways forward," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 150-159.
    21. Lund, Peter D. & Lindgren, Juuso & Mikkola, Jani & Salpakari, Jyri, 2015. "Review of energy system flexibility measures to enable high levels of variable renewable electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 785-807.
    22. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.
    23. Gottschamer, L. & Zhang, Q., 2016. "Interactions of factors impacting implementation and sustainability of renewable energy sourced electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 164-174.
    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. Michas, Serafeim & Stavrakas, Vassilis & Papadelis, Sotiris & Flamos, Alexandros, 2020. "A transdisciplinary modeling framework for the participatory design of dynamic adaptive policy pathways," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    2. Zhou, Yuekuan & Zheng, Siqian & Zhang, Guoqiang, 2020. "Machine-learning based study on the on-site renewable electrical performance of an optimal hybrid PCMs integrated renewable system with high-level parameters’ uncertainties," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 403-418.
    3. Gkonis, Nikolaos & Arsenopoulos, Apostolos & Stamatiou, Athina & Doukas, Haris, 2020. "Multi-perspective design of energy efficiency policies under the framework of national energy and climate action plans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    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. Auke Hoekstra & Maarten Steinbuch & Geert Verbong, 2017. "Creating Agent-Based Energy Transition Management Models That Can Uncover Profitable Pathways to Climate Change Mitigation," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-23, December.
    2. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    3. Fattahi, A. & Sijm, J. & Faaij, A., 2020. "A systemic approach to analyze integrated energy system modeling tools: A review of national models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    5. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    6. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    7. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    8. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    9. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.
    10. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    11. Magda M. Smink & Marko P. Hekkert & Simona O. Negro, 2015. "Keeping sustainable innovation on a leash? Exploring incumbents’ institutional strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 86-101, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Roberts, Cameron & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: Historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 221-240.
    14. Elnur T. Mekhdiev & Nursafa G. Khairullina & Alexandr S. Vereshchagin & Elena V. Takmakova & Olga M. Smirnova, 2018. "Review of Energy Transition Pathways Modeling," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(6), pages 299-312.
    15. Matschoss, Kaisa & Repo, Petteri, 2020. "Forward-looking network analysis of ongoing sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. Jens Hanson & Markus Steen & Tyson Weaver & Håkon E. Normann & Gard H. Hansen, 2016. "Path creation through branching and transfer of complementary resources: the role of established industries for new renewable energy technologies," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20160310, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    17. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank, 2017. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010-2050)," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S11/2017, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    18. Strambach, Simone & Pflitsch, Gesa, 2020. "Transition topology: Capturing institutional dynamics in regional development paths to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    19. Tao, Zhenmin & Moncada, Jorge Andrés & Poncelet, Kris & Delarue, Erik, 2021. "Review and analysis of investment decision making algorithms in long-term agent-based electric power system simulation models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    20. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.

    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:rensus:v:101:y:2019:i:c:p:440-452. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.