Policies for Energy Technology Innovation Systems

1. Policies forEnergy TechnologyInnovation Systems ArnulfGrubler IIASA & Yale University

2. Energy Technology Innovation Energy technology innovation isthe embodied result of institutionalized research, development and deployment effortsdriven by collective learning processesinvolving both suppliers and users of technologiesoperating in specific contextsof adoption environments and incentive structures. GEA Chapter 24

3. Chapter 24 Highlights & News New concepts:-- Systems perspective (ETIS)-- “granularity” of technologies/projects New quantifications:- ETIS resource mobilization- R&D in BRIMCS- knowledge depreciation- impacts of policy misalignments and volatility- innovation portfolio biases Generic criteria for policy design:-- Knowledge: feedbacks (experimentation), spillovers (globalization)-- Policy: stability, alignment-- Targets: systems, and portfolio based Literature review + research + 20 GEA case studies

4. World – Primary Energy Transitionschangeover time Δts: 80-130 years Begin of energy policy focus:Δt’s >2000 yrs Δt -130 yrs Δt -80 yrs Δt +130 yrs Δt +90 yrs

5. The GEA ETIS Framework

6. ETIS at Work: US Solar Thermal 1982-1992

7. Post Fossil Technologies Cost Trends

8. Cumulative Experience /Learning Favors “granular” Technologies learning Draft, table will be replaced by graphic in final presentation

9. Knowledge Depreciation Rates (% per year)empirical studies reviewed GEA KM24 (2012) andmodeled R&D deprecation in US manufacturing (Hall, 2007)

10. ETIS Actors & Institutions Institutional design for technology innovationremains amiss of importance of BRICs in energy R&D and “minimizes” global knowledge spillovers National Energy R&D(public+private) International Clean-tech collaborations(# of IEA implementation agreements) OECD vsBRICs

11. World ETIS Resource MobilizationBillion $2005 Source: GEA KM24, 2012

12. Public Policy-induced ETIS Investmentsbillion US$2005 Source: Wilson et al. Nature CC 2012

13. KNOWLEDGE generation learning Future Needs Analysis & Modelling Social Rates of Return shared expectations performance Learning Effects ACTORS & INSTITUTIONS Roadmaps & Portfolios TECHNOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS Technology Lifecycle Technology Collaborations Market Formation entrepreneurs / risk taking R,D&D(public $) Diffusion Support cost public policy & leverage resourceinputs RESOURCES Directable (Activities) Non-Directable (Outputs) key CLIMATE MITIGATION

14. KNOWLEDGE generation learning Future Needs Analysis & Modelling Social Rates of Return shared expectations performance Learning Effects ACTORS & INSTITUTIONS Roadmaps & Portfolios TECHNOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS Technology Lifecycle Technology Collaborations Market Formation entrepreneurs / risk taking R,D&D(public $) Diffusion Support cost public policy & leverage resourceinputs RESOURCES Directable (Activities) Non-Directable (Outputs) key supply : end-use (relative effort) CLIMATE MITIGATION

15. GEA Chapter 24 Authors and Resources Resources: Chapter 24: http://www.globalenergyassessment.org/Chapters/Chapter 24 Case studies: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/researchPrograms/TransitionstoNewTechnologies/CaseStudy_home.en.html Related publications: Gallagher, K.S., A. Grubler, L. Kuhl, G. Nemet, C. Wilson, 2012. The Energy Technology Innovation System. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37:137-62 doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-060311-133915. Wilson, C., Grubler, A., Gallagher, K. S., Nemet, G.F., 2012. Marginalization of end-use technologies in energy innovation for climate protection. Nature Climate Change, 2(11), 780-788, doi: 10.1038/nclimate1576. A. Grubler and C. Wilson (eds.), Energy Technology Innovation: Learning from Historical Successes and Failures,Cambridge University Press (in press)