@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{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{LilliestamPattBersalli2020, author = {Lilliestam, Johan and Patt, Anthony and Bersalli, German}, title = {The effect of carbon pricing on technological change for full energy decarbonization}, series = {Wiley interdisciplinary reviews : Climate change}, volume = {12}, journal = {Wiley interdisciplinary reviews : Climate change}, number = {1}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {1757-7780}, doi = {10.1002/wcc.681}, pages = {21}, year = {2020}, abstract = {In order to achieve the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, the world must reach net-zero carbon emissions around mid-century, which calls for an entirely new energy system. Carbon pricing, in the shape of taxes or emissions trading schemes, is often seen as the main, or only, necessary climate policy instrument, based on theoretical expectations that this would promote innovation and diffusion of the new technologies necessary for full decarbonization. Here, we review the empirical knowledge available in academic ex-post analyses of the effectiveness of existing, comparatively high-price carbon pricing schemes in the European Union, New Zealand, British Columbia, and the Nordic countries. Some articles find short-term operational effects, especially fuel switching in existing assets, but no article finds mentionable effects on technological change. Critically, all articles examining the effects on zero-carbon investment found that existing carbon pricing scheme have had no effect at all. We conclude that the effectiveness of carbon pricing in stimulating innovation and zero-carbon investment remains a theoretical argument. So far, there is no empirical evidence of its effectiveness in promoting the technological change necessary for full decarbonization. This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Economics of Mitigation}, 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{TroendleLilliestamMarellietal.2020, author = {Tr{\"o}ndle, Tim and Lilliestam, Johan and Marelli, Stefano and Pfenninger, Stefan}, title = {Trade-offs between geographic scale, cost, and infrastructure requirements for fully renewable electricity in Europe}, series = {Joule}, volume = {4}, journal = {Joule}, number = {9}, publisher = {Cell Press}, address = {Cambridge , Mass.}, issn = {2542-4351}, doi = {10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.018}, pages = {1929 -- 1948}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The European potential for renewable electricity is sufficient to enable fully renewable supply on different scales, from self-sufficient, subnational regions to an interconnected continent. We not only show that a continental-scale system is the cheapest, but also that systems on the national scale and below are possible at cost penalties of 20\% or less. Transmission is key to low cost, but it is not necessary to vastly expand the transmission system. When electricity is transmitted only to balance fluctuations, the transmission grid size is comparable to today's, albeit with expanded cross-border capacities. The largest differences across scales concern land use and thus social acceptance: in the continental system, generation capacity is concentrated on the European periphery, where the best resources are. Regional systems, in contrast, have more dispersed generation. The key trade-off is therefore not between geographic scale and cost, but between scale and the spatial distribution of required generation and transmission infrastructure.}, language = {en} }