IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v33y2011i5p840-852.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of technological learning and uranium price on nuclear cost: Preliminary insights from a multiple factors learning curve and uranium market modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Kahouli, Sondès

Abstract

This paper studies the effects of returns to scale, technological learning, i.e. learning-by-doing and learning-by-searching, and uranium price on the prospects of nuclear cost decrease. We use an extended learning curve specification, named multiple factors learning curve (MFLC). In a first stage, we estimate a single MFLC. In a second stage, we estimate the MFLC under the framework of simultaneous system of equations which takes into account the uranium supply and demand. This permits not only to enhance the reliability of the estimation by incorporating the uranium price formation mechanisms in the MFLC via the price variable, but also to give preliminary insights about uranium supply and demand behaviors and the associated effects on the nuclear expansion. Results point out that the nuclear cost has important prospects for decrease via capacity expansion, i.e. learning-by-doing effects. In contrast, they show that the learning-by-searching as well as the scale effects have a limited effect on the cost decrease prospects. Conversely, results also show that uranium price exerts a positive and significant effect on nuclear cost, implying that when the uranium price increases, the nuclear power generation cost decreases. Since uranium is characterized by important physical availability, and since it represents only a minor part in the total nuclear cost, we consider that in a context of increasing demand for nuclear energy the latter result can be explained by the fact that the positive learning effects on the cost of nuclear act in a way to dissipate the negative ones that an increase in uranium price may exert. Further, results give evidence of important inertia in the supply and demand sides as well as evidence of slow correlation between the uranium market and oil market which may limit the inter-fuels substituability effects, that is, nuclear capacity expansion and associated learning-by-doing benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:5:p:840-852
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988311000685
    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. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2009. "Testing for the presence of some features of increasing returns to adoption factors in energy system dynamics: An analysis via the learning curve approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1195-1212, February.
    2. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2008. "Technological learning in energy-environment-economy modelling: A survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 138-162, January.
    3. Ibenholt, Karin, 2002. "Explaining learning curves for wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(13), pages 1181-1189, October.
    4. Joskow, Paul L & Rozanski, George A, 1979. "The Effects of Learning by Doing on Nuclear Plant Operating Reliability," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 61(2), pages 161-168, May.
    5. Pan, Haoran & Kohler, Jonathan, 2007. "Technological change in energy systems: Learning curves, logistic curves and input-output coefficients," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 749-758, September.
    6. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    7. Goldemberg, Jose, 1996. "The evolution of ethanol costs in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(12), pages 1127-1128, December.
    8. Breusch, T S, 1978. "Testing for Autocorrelation in Dynamic Linear Models," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(31), pages 334-355, December.
    9. Bob Van der Zwaan, 2008. "Prospects for nuclear energy in Europe," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 30(1/2/3/4), pages 102-121.
    10. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    11. Godfrey, Leslie G, 1978. "Testing for Higher Order Serial Correlation in Regression Equations When the Regressors Include Lagged Dependent Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1303-1310, November.
    12. Papineau, Maya, 2006. "An economic perspective on experience curves and dynamic economies in renewable energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 422-432, March.
    13. Ostwald, Phillip F. & Reisdorf, John B., 1979. "Measurement of technology progress and capital cost for nuclear, coal-fired, and gas-fired power plants using the learning curve," Engineering and Process Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 435-454, December.
    14. Amavilah, Voxi Heinrich S., 1995. "The capitalist world aggregate supply and demand model for natural uranium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 211-220, July.
    15. 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.
    16. MacKerron, Gordon, 2004. "Nuclear power and the characteristics of `ordinariness'--the case of UK energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1957-1965, November.
    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. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    19. Söderholm, Patrik & Sundqvist, Thomas, 2007. "Empirical challenges in the use of learning curves for assessing the economic prospects of renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(15), pages 2559-2578.
    20. Andrew C. Harvey, 1990. "The Econometric Analysis of Time Series, 2nd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 026208189x, April.
    21. Barkai, Haim & Levhari, David, 1973. "The Impact of Experience on Kibbutz Farming," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 55(1), pages 56-63, February.
    22. Toth, Ferenc L. & Rogner, Hans-Holger, 2006. "Oil and nuclear power: Past, present, and future," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-25, January.
    23. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    24. Kobos, Peter H. & Erickson, Jon D. & Drennen, Thomas E., 2006. "Technological learning and renewable energy costs: implications for US renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1645-1658, September.
    25. Mackay, R.M & Probert, S.D, 1998. "Likely market-penetrations of renewable-energy technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-38, January.
    26. Junginger, M. & Faaij, A. & Turkenburg, W. C., 2005. "Global experience curves for wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 133-150, January.
    27. Esposto, Stefano, 2008. "The possible role of nuclear energy in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1584-1588, May.
    28. Neij, L, 1999. "Cost dynamics of wind power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 375-389.
    29. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-1294, September.
    30. Isoard, Stephane & Soria, Antonio, 2001. "Technical change dynamics: evidence from the emerging renewable energy technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 619-636, November.
    31. Tooraj Jamasb, 2006. "Technical Change Theory and Learning Curves: Patterns of Progress in Energy Technologies," Working Papers EPRG 0608, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    32. 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.
    33. Martin B. Zimmerman, 1982. "Learning Effects and the Commercialization of New Energy Technologies: The Case of Nuclear Power," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 297-310, Autumn.
    34. Klaassen, Ger & Miketa, Asami & Larsen, Katarina & Sundqvist, Thomas, 2005. "The impact of R&D on innovation for wind energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 227-240, August.
    35. Greenwood, Joen, 1981. "Uranium supply and demand : The Fifth Annual Symposium of the Uranium Institute, London, 2-4 September 1980," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 170-171, June.
    36. 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.
    37. Percebois, Jacques, 2003. "The peaceful uses of nuclear energy: technologies of the front and back-ends of the fuel cycle," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 101-108, January.
    38. Clarke, Leon & Weyant, John & Birky, Alicia, 2006. "On the sources of technological change: Assessing the evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 579-595, November.
    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. Xiao, Jin & Li, Guohao & Xie, Ling & Wang, Shouyang & Yu, Lean, 2021. "Decarbonizing China's power sector by 2030 with consideration of technological progress and cross-regional power transmission," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    2. Bernstein, David H. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2023. "On the performance of the United States nuclear power sector: A Bayesian approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Zirui Wang & Wanli Xing, 2022. "Study on the Characteristics and Evolution Trends of Global Uranium Resource Trade from the Perspective of a Complex Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    4. Rooney, Matthew & Nuttall, William J. & Kazantzis, Nikolaos, 2015. "A dynamic model of the global uranium market and the nuclear fuel cycle," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 50-60.
    5. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    6. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Lunde, Asger & Sandberg, Rickard & Söderberg, Magnus, 2019. "Calculating the damage of a cartel subject to transition periods: The international uranium cartel in the 1970s," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    8. Portugal-Pereira, J. & Ferreira, P. & Cunha, J. & Szklo, A. & Schaeffer, R. & Araújo, M., 2018. "Better late than never, but never late is better: Risk assessment of nuclear power construction projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 158-166.
    9. Linares, Pedro & Conchado, Adela, 2013. "The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 119-125.
    10. 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.

    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. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2008. "Technological learning in energy-environment-economy modelling: A survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 138-162, January.
    2. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2009. "Testing for the presence of some features of increasing returns to adoption factors in energy system dynamics: An analysis via the learning curve approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1195-1212, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Hong, Sungjun & Chung, Yanghon & Woo, Chungwon, 2015. "Scenario analysis for estimating the learning rate of photovoltaic power generation based on learning curve theory in South Korea," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 80-89.
    5. Lindman, Åsa & Söderholm, Patrik, 2012. "Wind power learning rates: A conceptual review and meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 754-761.
    6. Yu, C.F. & van Sark, W.G.J.H.M. & Alsema, E.A., 2011. "Unraveling the photovoltaic technology learning curve by incorporation of input price changes and scale effects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 324-337, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    9. 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.
    10. Grafström, Jonas & Lindman, Åsa, 2017. "Invention, innovation and diffusion in the European wind power sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 179-191.
    11. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. Castrejon-Campos, Omar & Aye, Lu & Hui, Felix Kin Peng, 2022. "Effects of learning curve models on onshore wind and solar PV cost developments in the USA," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    13. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2012. "A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 762-771.
    14. Qiu, Yueming & Anadon, Laura D., 2012. "The price of wind power in China during its expansion: Technology adoption, learning-by-doing, economies of scale, and manufacturing localization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 772-785.
    15. 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).
    16. Yu, Yang & Li, Hong & Che, Yuyuan & Zheng, Qiongjie, 2017. "The price evolution of wind turbines in China: A study based on the modified multi-factor learning curve," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 522-536.
    17. Junginger, M. & Faaij, A. & Turkenburg, W. C., 2005. "Global experience curves for wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 133-150, January.
    18. Rout, Ullash K. & Blesl, Markus & Fahl, Ulrich & Remme, Uwe & Voß, Alfred, 2009. "Uncertainty in the learning rates of energy technologies: An experiment in a global multi-regional energy system model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4927-4942, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Desroches, Louis-Benoit & Garbesi, Karina & Kantner, Colleen & Van Buskirk, Robert & Yang, Hung-Chia, 2013. "Incorporating experience curves in appliance standards analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 402-416.

    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:5:p:840-852. 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.