IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/wireae/v5y2016i1p16-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Future energy system development depends on past learning opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Clas‐Otto Wene

Abstract

Learning curves pervade all levels of industry and suggest deployment programs to buy down the cost of presently too expensive environment‐friendly technologies. However, the legitimate role of learning curves in a low‐carbon strategy depends on the validity of extrapolations and forecasts of the curves. Moving toward a technology‐led strategy for a low‐carbon energy system requires understanding of the learning mechanisms and their stability. The first part of this review provides examples of pervasive learning and a brief literature survey of recent learning curve measurements for energy technologies and the use of learning curves for scenario and policy analysis. The second part reviews how authors from two different perspectives understand the learning curves and come to different conclusions about their stability and legitimate role in scenario analysis and policy making. WIREs Energy Environ 2016, 5:16–32. doi: 10.1002/wene.172 This article is categorized under: Energy Systems Economics > Economics and Policy Energy and Climate > Economics and Policy Energy Policy and Planning > Economics and Policy Energy Research & Innovation > Economics and Policy

Suggested Citation

  • Clas‐Otto Wene, 2016. "Future energy system development depends on past learning opportunities," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 16-32, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:wireae:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:16-32
    DOI: 10.1002/wene.172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wene.172
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wene.172?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Interim monitoring of cost dynamics for publicly supported energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 825-835, March.
    2. 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.
    3. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    4. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    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. Bendler, John T. & Shlesinger, Michael F., 1991. "Fractal clusters in the learning curve," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 585-588.
    7. William D. Nordhaus, 2014. "The Perils of the Learning Model for Modeling Endogenous Technological Change," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    8. Junginger, M. & Faaij, A. & Turkenburg, W. C., 2005. "Global experience curves for wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 133-150, January.
    9. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2012. "A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 762-771.
    10. Neij, L, 1999. "Cost dynamics of wind power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 375-389.
    11. 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.
    12. Bernardo A. Huberman, 2001. "The Dynamics of Organizational Learning," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 145-153, August.
    13. Cowan, Robin & Gunby, Philip, 1996. "Sprayed to Death: Path Dependence, Lock-In and Pest Control Strategies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(436), pages 521-542, May.
    14. Clas-Otto Wene, 2011. "Energy Technology Learning - Key to Transform into a Low - Carbon Society," Chapters, in: Juan A. Blanco & Houshang Kheradmand (ed.), Climate Change - Research and Technology for Adaptation and Mitigation, IntechOpen.
    15. Sabine Messner, 1997. "Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 291-313.
    16. Auerswald, Philip & Kauffman, Stuart & Lobo, Jose & Shell, Karl, 2000. "The production recipes approach to modeling technological innovation: An application to learning by doing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 389-450, March.
    17. Neij, Lena, 1997. "Use of experience curves to analyse the prospects for diffusion and adoption of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(13), pages 1099-1107, November.
    18. John F. Muth, 1986. "Search Theory and the Manufacturing Progress Function," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(8), pages 948-962, August.
    19. Martinsen, Thomas, 2011. "Technology learning in a small open economy--The systems, modelling and exploiting the learning effect," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2361-2372, May.
    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. Wiebe, Kirsten S. & Lutz, Christian, 2016. "Endogenous technological change and the policy mix in renewable power generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 739-751.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Lindman, Åsa & Söderholm, Patrik, 2012. "Wind power learning rates: A conceptual review and meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 754-761.
    5. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2012. "A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 762-771.
    6. Mauleón, Ignacio, 2016. "Photovoltaic learning rate estimation: Issues and implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 507-524.
    7. Karali, Nihan & Park, Won Young & McNeil, Michael, 2017. "Modeling technological change and its impact on energy savings in the U.S. iron and steel sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 447-458.
    8. Nicodemus, Julia Haltiwanger, 2018. "Technological learning and the future of solar H2: A component learning comparison of solar thermochemical cycles and electrolysis with solar PV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 100-109.
    9. Santhakumar, Srinivasan & Meerman, Hans & Faaij, André, 2021. "Improving the analytical framework for quantifying technological progress in energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Kumbaroglu, Gürkan & Madlener, Reinhard & Demirel, Mustafa, 2008. "A real options evaluation model for the diffusion prospects of new renewable power generation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1882-1908, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Elia, A. & Taylor, M. & Ó Gallachóir, B. & Rogan, F., 2020. "Wind turbine cost reduction: A detailed bottom-up analysis of innovation drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    15. 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.
    16. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    17. 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).
    18. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2008. "Technological learning in energy-environment-economy modelling: A survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 138-162, January.

    More about this item

    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:bla:wireae:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:16-32. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=2041-8396 .

    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.