u s electric power generation planning under endogenous learning by searching technology change n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 15

U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 128 Views
  • Uploaded on

U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change. Tuesday, October 11, 2011 Session 31: Electricity Demand Modeling and Capacity Planning USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, Washington DC

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change' - mirra


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
u s electric power generation planning under endogenous learning by searching technology change

U.S. Electric Power Generation Planning under Endogenous Learning-by-Searching Technology Change

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Session 31: Electricity Demand Modeling and Capacity Planning

USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, Washington DC

Nidhi R. Santen, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (nrsanten@mit.edu)

Mort D. Webster, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

David Popp, Syracuse University/National Bureau of Economic Research

slide2

Introduction (1 of 2)

EIA, AER 2009; EIA 2011

slide3

Introduction (2 of 2)

Government

Makes Environmental Policies

Electric UtilitiesBuild Power Plants Using Available Generation Technologies

Two main policy pathways to reduce cumulative power sector emissions

“Now v. Later”

“Adoption v. Innovation”

1. Constraining Regulations

2. Production Support

New or Improved Generation Technologies

Direct R&D Support

CO2Emissions

Increased Demand for Technologies

Power System Technology R&D

(Public and Private)

NaturalEnvironment

slide4

Research Question and Outline

  • Research Question:
  • What is the socially optimal balance of inter-temporal regulatory policy and
  • technology-specificR&D expenditures for the U.S. electricity generation sector, given a
  • specific cumulative climate target?”
  • Outline for Today’s Presentation
  • Overview of existing electricity sector planning models’ capabilities
  • Introduction of the current modeling framework
  • Snapshots from first results
  • Future research
  • Summary
slide5

1. Overview of Existing Numerical Power Generation Expansion Models (1 of 2)

  • Top-Down v. Bottom-up Models
  • Top-Down: Use Average Costs and Assume Capacity Factors
  • Bottom-Up: Use Specific Costs (e.g., Capital, O&M, Fuel) and Solve for Capacity Factors
  • Rigorously studying emissions potentials from the power sector requires modeling operational details of the physical system (more easily resolved in bottom-up models).

Including Operational Realism Matters!

Results Preview – More Detail

Results Preview – Less Detail

slide6

1. Overview of Existing Numerical Power Generation Expansion Models (2 of 2)

Common Methods to Model Technology Change and Learning Dynamics

Decision Variables: Capacity Additions

1. (Exogenous) Fixed Trend:

CapCostt,g = CapCostt-1,g*(1+ α)

2. (Endogenous) Learning-by-Doing:

CapCostt,g = InitialCapCostg/ (CapitalStockt,g)LBDCoeff

Decision Variables: Capacity Additions + R&D Investments

3. (Endogenous) Learning-by-Searching:

CapCostt,g = InitialCapCostg / (KnowledgeStockt,g)LBSCoeff

KnowledgeStockt,g= δΣ1:t-1R&D$t,g+ R&D$t,g

4. 2-Factor Learning Curves (2FLC):

CapCostt,g = InitialCapCostg / [(CapitalStockt,g)LBDCoeff2 * (KnowledgeStockt,g)LBSCoeff2]

KnowledgeStockt,g= δΣ1:t-1R&D$t,g+ R&D$t,g

slide7

2. Modeling Framework for this Research

  • Generation Planning Inputs

Environmental Policy

  • Generation Planning Model
  • Generation Planning Model

Generation Technology Costs ($/MWh)

Electricity Demand (MW/time)

Generation Technology Availability (Year)

  • R&D$
  • New Power Plant Additions(GW)Production (GWh)

Technology Change Module “Innovation Possibilities Frontier”

ht = aRD$bHΦ

Learning by Researching

Learning by Experience

Knowledge Stock (H)

  • CO2 Emissions (Million Metric Tons)

Ht,g= (1-δ)Ht-1,g + ht,g

  • New Knowledge (h)
slide8

2. Modeling Framework for this Research

  • Structural Details
  • Centralized, social planning (decision-support model)
  • Representative technologies of the U.S. system
  • Representative U.S. load duration curve
  • 50-year planning horizon, 10-year time steps
  • Objective
  • Decision Variables (per period)
  • (1) R&D $ (by Technology)
  • (2) Carbon Cap
  • (3) Generation Expansion
  • (4) Generation Operation
  • Key Constraints
  • (1) All traditional generation expansion constraints (e.g., demand balance, reliability, non-cycling nuclear technology, etc.)
  • (2) Cumulative carbon cap
  • (3) Cumulative R&D funding account balance

Generation Technologies

Coal w CCS

Gas CT

Hydro

Other

Advanced Coal

Gas CC

Nuclear

Solar

Coal

Steam Gas

Wind

slide9

3. First Results: With and Without Learning-by-Searching

(under a Medium Cumulative Emissions Target)

No LBS

With LBS (NPVLBS < NPVNoLBS)

slide11

3. First Results: Sensitivity of Innovation Possibilities Parameters (Strong CCS Possibilities under a Medium Emissions Target)

Base Case Innovation Possibilities

Strong CCS Innovation Possibilities

slide12

4. Future Research

  • Model optimal generation (carbon cap distribution) and R&D investment decisions under multiple uncertain innovation possibilities using stochastic dynamic programming
slide13

Summary

  • Studying how to balance regulatory efforts and R&D efforts for the electricity generation sector requires a decision model where the capital costs of technology change endogenously with respect to new builds (adoption) and new research (innovation)
  • Rigorous study of emissions management from the power sector requires operational details of the physical system, embodied within bottom-up type models.
  • Results confirm both a “tradeoff” and “interaction” between adoption v. innovation for technologies with strong learning potentials (dynamics that are popular in the theoretical literature)
  • More research needs to be done to 1) understand the sensitivity of innovation parameters on decisions, 2) compare these results with more traditional knowledge stock formulations, and 3) model the effect of uncertainty of returns to research on near-term regulatory and R&D decisions.
thank you
Thank You
  • Source: US EPA E-Grid Database & NPR.org
slide15

References

Title Slide Photo Credits (from left to right): (1) www.scientificamerican.com (2) http://www.pelamiswave.com(3) Sandia National Labs (4) http://www.metaefficient.com (5) http://img.dailymail.co.uk (6) https://inlportal.inl.gov

Barreto, L.and S. Kypreos. (2004). “EndogenizingR&D and market experience in the "bottom-up" energy-systems ERIS model,” Technovation,24(8):615-629.

Fischer, C. and R. G. Newell. (2008). “Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation.” Energy Economics 55: 142-162.

Hobbs, B. F. (1995). “Optimization methods for electric utility resource planning.” European Journal of Operational Research 83:1-20.

Ibenholt, K. (2002). “Explaining learning curves for wind power,” Energy Policy 30: 1181-1189.

Jaffe, A., and M. Trajtenberg. (2002). Patents, citations, & innovations: a window on the knowledge economy. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 478pp.

Johnstone, N., Hascic, I, and D. Popp. (2010). “Renewable Energy Policies and Technological Innovation: Evidence Based on Patent Counts,” Environmental Resource Econ, 45: 133-155.

Messner, S. (1997). “Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model,” J Evol Econ 7: 291-313.

Miketa, A. and L. Schrattenholzer. (2004). “Experiments with a methodology to model the role of R&D expenditures in energy technology learning processes.” Energy Policy, 32(15):1679-1692.

Popp, D. (2002). “Induced Innovation and Energy Prices.” American Economic Review 92(1): 160-180.

Popp, D. (2006). “ENTICE-BR: Backstop Technology in the ENTICE Model of Climate Change.” Energy Economics28(2): 188-222.

Popp, D. (2006b). “They Don't Invent Them Like They Used To: An Examination of Energy Patent Citations Over Time.” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 15(8): 753-776.