Search

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

Search Results for All:
(Showing results 1 to 2 of 2)



Demand Subsidies Versus R&D: Comparing the Uncertain Impacts of Policy on a Pre-commercial Low-carbon Energy Technology

Gregory F. Nemet and Erin Baker

Year: 2009
Volume: Volume 30
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No4-2
View Abstract

Abstract:
We combine an expert elicitation and a bottom-up manufacturing cost model to compare the effects of R&D and demand subsidies. We model their effects on the future costs of a low-carbon energy technology that is not currently commercially available, purely organic photovoltaics (PV). We find that: (1) successful R&D enables PV to achieve a cost target of 4c/kWh, (2) the cost of PV does not reach the target when only subsidies, and not R&D, are implemented, and (3) production-related effects on technological advance�learning-by-doing and economies of scale�are not as critical to the long-term potential for cost reduction in organic PV than is the investment in and success of R&D. These results are insensitive to two levels of policy intensity, the level of a carbon price, the availability of storage technology, and uncertainty in the main parameters used in the model. However, a case can still be made for subsidies: comparisons of stochastic dominance show that subsidies provide a hedge against failure in the R&D program.



Willingness to Pay for a Climate Backstop: Liquid Fuel Producers and Direct CO2 Air Capture

Gregory F. Nemet and Adam R. Brandt

Year: 2012
Volume: Volume 33
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol33-No1-3
View Abstract

Abstract:
We conduct a sensitivity analysis to describe conditions under which liquid fuel producers would fund the development of a climate backstop. We estimate (1) the cost to develop competitively priced direct CO2 air capture technology, a possible climate backstop and (2) the effect of this technology on the value of liquid fuel reserves by country and fuel. Under most assumptions, development costs exceed individual benefits. A particularly robust result is that carbon prices generate large benefits for conventional oil producers--making a climate backstop unappealing for them. Unilateral investment does become more likely under: stringent carbon policy, social discount rates, improved technical outcomes, and high price elasticity of demand for liquid fuels. Early stage investment is inexpensive and could provide a hedge against such developments, particularly for fuels on the margin, such as tar sands and gas-to-liquids. Since only a few entities benefit, free riding is not an important disincentive to investment, although uncertainty about who benefits probably is.

Keywords: Air capture, Backstop technology, Climate policy, Learning by doing, R&D, Unconventional oil





Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 

© 2024 International Association for Energy Economics | Privacy Policy | Return Policy