@article{LilliestamOllierLabordenaMiretal.2020, author = {Lilliestam, Johan and Ollier, Lana and Labordena Mir, Merc{\`e} and Pfenninger, Stefan and Thonig, Richard}, title = {The near- to mid-term outlook for concentrating solar power}, series = {Energy sources. B, Economics, planning and policy}, volume = {16}, journal = {Energy sources. B, Economics, planning and policy}, number = {1}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, address = {London [u.a.]}, issn = {1556-7249}, doi = {10.1080/15567249.2020.1773580}, pages = {23 -- 41}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The history of concentrating solar power (CSP) is characterized by a boom-bust pattern caused by policy support changes. Following the 2014-2016 bust phase, the combination of Chinese support and several low-cost projects triggered a new boom phase. We investigate the near- to mid-term cost, industry, market and policy outlook for the global CSP sector and show that CSP costs have decreased strongly and approach cost-competitiveness with new conventional generation. Industry has been strengthened through the entry of numerous new companies. However, the project pipeline is thin: no project broke ground in 2019 and only four projects are under construction in 2020. The only remaining large support scheme, in China, has been canceled. Without additional support soon creating a new market, the value chain may collapse and recent cost and technological advances may be undone. If policy support is renewed, however, the global CSP sector is prepared for a bright future.}, language = {en} } @article{LilliestamMelligerOllieretal.2020, author = {Lilliestam, Johan and Melliger, Marc Andr{\´e} and Ollier, Lana and Schmidt, Tobias S. and Steffen, Bjarne}, title = {Understanding and accounting for the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on global learning rates}, series = {Nature energy}, volume = {5}, journal = {Nature energy}, number = {1}, publisher = {Nature Publishing Group}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2058-7546}, doi = {10.1038/s41560-019-0531-y}, pages = {71 -- 78}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Learning rates are a central concept in energy system models and integrated assessment models, as they allow researchers to project the future costs of new technologies and to optimize energy system costs. Here we argue that exchange rate fluctuations are an important, but thus far overlooked, determinant of the learning-rate variance observed in the literature. We explore how empirically observed global learning rates depend on where technologies are installed and which currency is used to calculate the learning rate. Using global data of large-scale photovoltaic (>= 5 MW) plants, we show that the currency choice can result in learning-rate differences of up to 16 percentage points. We then introduce an adjustment factor to correct for the effect of exchange rate and market focus fluctuations and discuss the implications of our findings for innovation scholars, energy modellers and decision makers.
Learning rates are a measure of reduction in costs of energy from technologies such as solar photovoltaics. These are often estimated internationally with all monetary figures converted to a single currency, often US dollars. Lilliestam et al. show that such conversions can significantly affect the learning rate estimates.}, language = {en} } @article{OllierMelligerLilliestam2020, author = {Ollier, Lana and Melliger, Marc Andr{\´e} and Lilliestam, Johan}, title = {Friends or foes?}, series = {Energies : open-access journal of related scientific research, technology development and studies in policy and management}, volume = {13}, journal = {Energies : open-access journal of related scientific research, technology development and studies in policy and management}, number = {23}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, issn = {1996-1073}, doi = {10.3390/en13236339}, pages = {23}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Energy efficiency measures and the deployment of renewable energy are commonly presented as two sides of the same coin-as necessary and synergistic measures to decarbonize energy systems and reach the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Here, we quantitatively investigate the policies and performances of the EU Member States to see whether renewables and energy efficiency policies are politically synergistic or if they rather compete for political attention and resources. We find that Member States, especially the ones perceived as climate leaders, tend to prioritize renewables over energy efficiency in target setting. Further, almost every country performs well in either renewable energy or energy efficiency, but rarely performs well in both. We find no support for the assertion that the policies are synergistic, but some evidence that they compete. However, multi-linear regression models for performance show that performance, especially in energy efficiency, is also strongly associated with general economic growth cycles, and not only efficiency policy as such. We conclude that renewable energy and energy efficiency are not synergistic policies, and that there is some competition between them.}, language = {en} } @article{OllierMetzNunezJimenezetal.2022, author = {Ollier, Lana and Metz, Florence and Nu{\~n}ez-Jimenez, Alejandro and Sp{\"a}th, Leonhard and Lilliestam, Johan}, title = {The European 2030 climate and energy package}, series = {Policy sciences}, volume = {55}, journal = {Policy sciences}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer Science+Business Media LLC}, address = {New York}, issn = {0032-2687}, doi = {10.1007/s11077-022-09447-5}, pages = {161 -- 184}, year = {2022}, abstract = {The European Union's 2030 climate and energy package introduced fundamental changes compared to its 2020 predecessor. These changes included a stronger focus on the internal market and an increased emphasis on technology-neutral decarbonization while simultaneously de-emphasizing the renewables target. This article investigates whether changes in domestic policy strategies of leading member states in European climate policy preceded the observed changes in EU policy. Disaggregating strategic change into changes in different elements (goals, objectives, instrumental logic), allows us to go beyond analyzing the relative prioritization of different goals, and to analyze how policy requirements for reaching those goals were dynamically redefined over time. To this end, we introduce a new method, which based on insights from social network analysis, enables us to systematically trace those strategic chances. We find that shifts in national strategies of the investigated member states preceded the shift in EU policy. In particular, countries reframed their understanding of supply security, and pushed for the internal electricity market also as a security measure to balance fluctuating renewables. Hence, the increasing focus on markets and market integration in the European 2030 package echoed the increasingly central role of the internal market for electricity supply security in national strategies. These findings also highlight that countries dynamically redefined their goals relative to the different phases of the energy transition.}, language = {en} }