Published October 2014 | Version v1
Journal article

The dynamics of technology diffusion and the impacts of climate policy instruments in the decarbonisation of the global electricity sector

  • 1. Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research (4CMR), Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge, 19 Silver Street, Cambridge CB3 1EP (United Kingdom)
  • 2. Cambridge Econometrics Ltd, Covent Garden, Cambridge CB1 2HT (United Kingdom)
  • 3. Environment, Earth and Ecosystems, Open University, Milton Keynes (United Kingdom)

Description

This paper presents an analysis of climate policy instruments for the decarbonisation of the global electricity sector in a non-equilibrium economic and technology diffusion perspective. Energy markets are driven by innovation, path-dependent technology choices and diffusion. However, conventional optimisation models lack detail on these aspects and have limited ability to address the effectiveness of policy interventions because they do not represent decision-making. As a result, known effects of technology lock-ins are liable to be underestimated. In contrast, our approach places investor decision-making at the core of the analysis and investigates how it drives the diffusion of low-carbon technology in a highly disaggregated, hybrid, global macroeconometric model, FTT:Power-E3MG. Ten scenarios to 2050 of the electricity sector in 21 regions exploring combinations of electricity policy instruments are analysed, including their climate impacts. We show that in a diffusion and path-dependent perspective, the impact of combinations of policies does not correspond to the sum of impacts of individual instruments: synergies exist between policy tools. We argue that the carbon price required to break the current fossil technology lock-in can be much lower when combined with other policies, and that a 90% decarbonisation of the electricity sector by 2050 is affordable without early scrapping. - Highlights: • Policy scenarios for decarbonising of the global electricity sector by 90%. • Strong synergies exist between different energy policy instruments. • Carbon pricing not a sufficient policy instrument for large emissions reductions. • Improved agent behaviour assumptions for energy modelling beyond cost-optimisation

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.029

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.029;
arXiv
arXiv:1309.7626v4;
PII
S0301-4215(14)00401-7;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Energy Policy
Journal Volume
73
Journal Page Range
p. 686-700
ISSN
0301-4215
CODEN
ENPYAC

INIS

Country of Publication
United Kingdom
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
46099715
Subject category
S29: ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; S54: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES;
Descriptors DEI
AIR POLLUTION ABATEMENT; CARBON; CLIMATIC CHANGE; DECARBONIZATION; DECISION MAKING; DIFFUSION; ECONOMICS; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY SYSTEMS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; MARKET; OPTIMIZATION; PRICES; SIMULATION
Descriptors DEC
ELEMENTS; GOVERNMENT POLICIES; NONMETALS; POLLUTION ABATEMENT

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2014 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.