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. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. Ottmar Edenhofer & Brigitte Knopf & Terry Barker & Lavinia Baumstark & Elie Bellevrat & Bertrand Chateau & Patrick Criqui & Morna Isaac & Alban Kitous & Socrates Kypreos & Marian Leimbach & Kai Lessma, 2010. "The Economics of Low Stabilization: Model Comparison of Mitigation Strategies and Costs," The Energy Journal, , vol. 31(1_suppl), pages 11-48, June.
    8. -, 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).
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Steve Bankes, 1993. "Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 435-449, June.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Gritsevskyi, Andrii & Nakicenovi, Nebojsa, 2000. "Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 907-921, November.
    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. 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.
    2. Erin Baker & Olaitan Olaleye & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2015. "Decision Frameworks and the Investment in R&D," Working Papers 2015.42, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    3. Olaleye, Olaitan & Baker, Erin, 2015. "Large scale scenario analysis of future low carbon energy options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 203-216.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Michetti, Melania & Parrado, Ramiro, 2012. "Improving Land-use modelling within CGE to assess Forest-based Mitigation Potential and Costs," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 122862, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Favero, Alice & Mendelsohn, Robert & Sohngen, Brent, 2016. "Carbon Storage and Bioenergy: Using Forests for Climate Mitigation," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 232215, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    12. Ottmar Edenhofer & Susanne Kadner & Christoph von Stechow & Gregor Schwerhoff & Gunnar Luderer, 2014. "Linking climate change mitigation research to sustainable development," Chapters, in: Giles Atkinson & Simon Dietz & Eric Neumayer & Matthew Agarwala (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development, chapter 30, pages 476-499, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Wachsmuth, Jakob & Denishchenkova, Alexandra & Fekete, Hanna & Parra, Paola & Schaeffer, Michiel & Ancygier, Andrzej & Sferra, Fabio, 2019. "Fairness- and cost-effectiveness-based approaches to effort-sharing under the Paris agreement," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S04/2019, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    14. Bachner, G. & Mayer, J. & Steininger, K.W. & Anger-Kraavi, A. & Smith, A. & Barker, T.S., 2020. "Uncertainties in macroeconomic assessments of low-carbon transition pathways - The case of the European iron and steel industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    15. 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).
    16. Max Franks & Ottmar Edenhofer & Kai Lessmann, 2017. "Why Finance Ministers Favor Carbon Taxes, Even If They Do Not Take Climate Change into Account," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 445-472, November.
    17. Edenhofer, Ottmar & Hirth, Lion & Knopf, Brigitte & Pahle, Michael & Schlömer, Steffen & Schmid, Eva & Ueckerdt, Falko, 2013. "On the economics of renewable energy sources," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 12-23.
    18. Favero, Alice & Massetti, Emanuele, 2014. "Trade of woody biomass for electricity generation under climate mitigation policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 166-190.
    19. Derek Lemoine & Sabine Fuss & Jana Szolgayova & Michael Obersteiner & Daniel Kammen, 2012. "The influence of negative emission technologies and technology policies on the optimal climate mitigation portfolio," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 141-162, July.
    20. Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Rive, Nathan A. & Mideksa, Torben K., 2012. "Europe’s climate goals and the electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 200-211.

    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.