IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i3p825-835.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interim monitoring of cost dynamics for publicly supported energy technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Nemet, Gregory F.

Abstract

The combination of substantial public funding of nascent energy technologies and recent increases in the costs of those that have been most heavily supported has raised questions about whether policy makers should sustain, alter, enhance, or terminate such programs. This paper uses experience curves for photovoltaics (PV) and wind to (1) estimate ranges of costs for these public programs and (2) introduce new ways of evaluating recent cost dynamics. For both technology cases, the estimated costs of the subsidies required to reach targets are sensitive to the choice of time period on which cost projections are based. The variation in the discounted social cost of subsidies exceeds an order of magnitude. Vigilance is required to avoid the very expensive outcomes contained within these distributions of social costs. Two measures of the significance of recent deviations are introduced. Both indicate that wind costs are within the expected range of prior forecasts but that PV costs are not. The magnitude of the public funds involved in these programs heightens the need for better analytical tools with which to monitor and evaluate cost dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Interim monitoring of cost dynamics for publicly supported energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 825-835, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:3:p:825-835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(08)00591-0
    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, 2008. "Technological learning in energy-environment-economy modelling: A survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 138-162, January.
    2. Arthur van Benthem & Kenneth Gillingham & James Sweeney, 2008. "Learning-by-Doing and the Optimal Solar Policy in California," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 131-152.
    3. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    4. Goldemberg, Jose & Coelho, Suani Teixeira & Lucon, Oswaldo, 2004. "How adequate policies can push renewables," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1141-1146, June.
    5. 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.
    6. van der Zwaan, Bob & Rabl, Ari, 2004. "The learning potential of photovoltaics: implications for energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(13), pages 1545-1554, September.
    7. Baker, Erin & Adu-Bonnah, Kwame, 2008. "Investment in risky R&D programs in the face of climate uncertainty," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 465-486, March.
    8. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    9. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Rubin, Edward S. & Yeh, Sonia & Antes, Matt & Berkenpas, Michael & Davison, John, 2007. "Use of experience curves to estimate the future cost of power plants with CO2 capture," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt46x6h0n0, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    12. Ottmar Edenhofer & Kai Lessmann & Claudia Kemfert & Michael Grubb & Jonathan Köhler, 2006. "Induced Technological Change: Exploring its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: Synthesis Report from the innovation Modeling Comparison Project," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(1_suppl), pages 57-108, January.
    13. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1994. "Exploring the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521452700.
    14. Junginger, M. & Faaij, A. & Turkenburg, W. C., 2005. "Global experience curves for wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 133-150, January.
    15. Sue Wing, Ian, 2006. "Representing induced technological change in models for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 539-562, November.
    16. Albrecht, Johan, 2007. "The future role of photovoltaics: A learning curve versus portfolio perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2296-2304, April.
    17. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E., 2007. "A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5630-5642, November.
    18. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    19. Uyterlinde, Martine A. & Junginger, Martin & de Vries, Hage J. & Faaij, Andre P.C. & Turkenburg, Wim C., 2007. "Implications of technological learning on the prospects for renewable energy technologies in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4072-4087, August.
    20. Shum, Kwok L. & Watanabe, Chihiro, 2007. "Photovoltaic deployment strategy in Japan and the USA--an institutional appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1186-1195, February.
    21. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    22. Gritsevskyi, Andrii & Nakicenovi, Nebojsa, 2000. "Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 907-921, November.
    23. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1994. "Exploring the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521459556.
    24. Dennis Epple & Linda Argote & Rukmini Devadas, 1991. "Organizational Learning Curves: A Method for Investigating Intra-Plant Transfer of Knowledge Acquired Through Learning by Doing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 58-70, February.
    25. Sabine Messner, 1997. "Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 291-313.
    26. Irwin, Douglas A & Klenow, Peter J, 1994. "Learning-by-Doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1200-1227, December.
    27. Neij, Lena & Astrand, Kerstin, 2006. "Outcome indicators for the evaluation of energy policy instruments and technical change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2662-2676, November.
    28. Rubin, Edward S & Taylor, Margaret R & Yeh, Sonia & Hounshell, David A, 2004. "Learning curves for environmental technology and their importance for climate policy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1551-1559.
    29. Popp, David, 2006. "ENTICE-BR: The effects of backstop technology R&D on climate policy models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 188-222, March.
    30. Arthur, W. Brian, 2006. "Out-of-Equilibrium Economics and Agent-Based Modeling," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 32, pages 1551-1564, Elsevier.
    31. Alberth, Stephan & Hope, Chris, 2007. "Climate modelling with endogenous technical change: Stochastic learning and optimal greenhouse gas abatement in the PAGE2002 model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1795-1807, March.
    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. Gregory F. Nemet, 2006. "How well does Learning-by-doing Explain Cost Reductions in a Carbon-free Energy Technology?," Working Papers 2006.143, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    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. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Mauleón, Ignacio, 2016. "Photovoltaic learning rate estimation: Issues and implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 507-524.
    10. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    11. 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.
    12. van Blommestein, Kevin & Daim, Tugrul U. & Cho, Yonghee & Sklar, Paul, 2018. "Structuring financial incentives for residential solar electric systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 28-40.
    13. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. Jouvet, Pierre-André & Schumacher, Ingmar, 2012. "Learning-by-doing and the costs of a backstop for energy transition and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 122-132.
    17. Arthur van Benthem & Kenneth Gillingham & James Sweeney, 2008. "Learning-by-Doing and the Optimal Solar Policy in California," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 131-152.
    18. 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.
    19. Michael Grubb & Jean-Francois Mercure & Pablo Salas & Rutger-Jan Lange & Ida Sognnaes, 2018. "Systems Innovation, Inertia and Pliability: A mathematical exploration with implications for climate change abatement," Working Papers EPRG 1808, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    20. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Lessmann, Kai, 2012. "Learning or lock-in: Optimal technology policies to support mitigation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23.

    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:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:3:p:825-835. 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/enpol .

    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.