Climate Change Technology R&D Portfolio Analysis under Uncertainty Erin Baker, UMass Amherst Presented at The International Energy Workshop Venice, Italy.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
What does REMI say? sm Tools for Evaluating Climate Change Policies with REMI PI+
Advertisements

Christian Azar Based on joint work with Björn Sandén Chalmers University, Göteborg Sweden Near-term technology policies for.
Valuing Our Life Support Systems Savoy Place, 29 April 2009 IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT: CLIMATE CHANGE Robert M May Zoology Department Oxford OX1 3PS,
Demos Europa The EU % renewables target Dieter Helm Professor of Energy Policy University of Oxford November 19th 2008.
Castellanza, 20 th October and 3 rd November, 2010 FINANCIAL INVESTMENTS ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION. Corporate Finance.
Modeling the Future Costs of Carbon Capture using Experts’ Elicited Probabilities Under Policy Scenarios July 2013 Gregory Nemet, Erin Baker, and Karen.
Climate Change 1. What is climate change? IPCC: A change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean and/or the variability.
Lecture Presentation Software to accompany Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management Seventh Edition by Frank K. Reilly & Keith C. Brown Chapter.
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE The Art of Modeling with Spreadsheets STEPHEN G. POWELL KENNETH R. BAKER Compatible with Analytic Solver Platform FOURTH EDITION CHAPTER.
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable.
Future role of renewable energy in Germany against the background of climate change mitigation and liberalisation Dipl.-Ing. Uwe Remme Institute of Energy.
AN INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
Western States Energy & Environment Symposium October 27, 2009.
Chapter 6 An Introduction to Portfolio Management.
Study Project TRANS-CSP Trans-Mediterranean Interconnection for Concentrating Solar Power (WP03 Policies and Finance) Project for the Research & Development.
MITIGATION POTENTIAL AND EMISSION REDUCTION CONFIDENTIAL 1.
Mitigation and Adaptation Under Uncertainty NCAR ASP Uncertainty Colloquium Mort Webster (Penn State) 28 July 2014.
1 Optimal Technology R&D in the Face of Climate Uncertainty Erin Baker University of Massachusetts, Amherst Presented at Umass INFORMS October 2004.
1 Real Options Analysis Office Tower Building Portfolio Presentation Fall 2008 ESD.71 Professor: Richard de Neufville Presented by: Charbel Rizk.
AN INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
Risk and Uncertainty Econ 373 Environmental Economics February 8,
Environmental sustainability: policy issues from an innovation perspective DIMETIC, Pecs, 12 July 2007 Keith Smith Australian Innovation Research Centre.
Sergey Paltsev Massachusetts Institute of Technology Low-Carbon Russia: Myth or Reality? Moscow, Russia January 15, 2015.
CHEAPER AND CLEANER: Using the Clean Air Act to Sharply Reduce Carbon Pollution from Existing Power Plants, Delivering Health, Environmental and Economic.
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE 1 Dr. Robert K. Dixon Head, Energy Technology Policy Division International Energy Agency.
1 Break out group 2-Technological developments and policies and measures Issues discussed: Hydrogen Energy efficiency Biomass and biofuels Infrastructure.
Using experience and market curves to inform energy technology subsidy policy Eric Williams, Schuyler Matteson Rochester Institute of Technology Seth Herron.
Stiftelsen Frischsenteret for samfunnsøkonomisk forskning Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic Research Climate Agreements and Technology.
Version 1.2 Copyright © 2000 by Harcourt, Inc. All rights reserved. Requests for permission to make copies of any part of the work should be mailed to:
Lecture Presentation Software to accompany Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management Seventh Edition by Frank K. Reilly & Keith C. Brown Chapter 7.
City of Watsonville Climate Action Plan and Carbon Fund Project Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #7 Final Meeting April 9, 2014.
Some Background Assumptions Markowitz Portfolio Theory
Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management Chapter 7.
Modeling Technology Transitions under Increasing Returns, Uncertainty, and Heterogeneous Agents Tieju Ma Transition to New Technology (TNT) International.
1 Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy THE IMPACT OF A CARBON CONTROL PROGRAM ON LOW-INCOME CONSUMERS Joel Eisenberg ORNL
Crossing Methodological Borders to Develop and Implement an Approach for Determining the Value of Energy Efficiency R&D Programs Presented at the American.
ESRC Energy Research Conference Policy Studies Institute Decarbonisation of Energy Systems Dennis Anderson Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and.
1 ECGD4214 Systems Engineering & Economy. 2 Lecture 1 Part 1 Introduction to Engineering Economics.
Expected Payback Period as a key factor shaping future energy mix Robert Uberman Expert in natural resources strategy, finance and R&D.
Discounting. Discounting handout Discounting is a method for placing weights on future values to convert them into present values so that they can be.
COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION: TECHNICAL STUDY RESULTS Peninsula Clean Energy September 24,2015.
Building a low-carbon economy The UK’s innovation challenge 19 th July
Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management First Canadian Edition By Reilly, Brown, Hedges, Chang 6.
L Click to edit Master text styles l Second level l Third level l Fourth level l Fifth level Representing the European electricity industry at expert,
CTMS Annual Retreat 2009 “Making connections” Dalia Patino Echeverri, Assistant Professor of Energy Systems and Public Policy Nicholas School of the Environment.
1 Estimating Return and Risk Chapter 7 Jones, Investments: Analysis and Management.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHALE GAS PRODUCTION AND CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE UNDER CO2 TAXES: MARKAL MODELING Nadja Victor and Chris Nichols Pittsburgh,
‘Real Options’ Framework to Assess Public Research Investments Nicholas S. Vonortas Center for International Science and Technology Policy & Department.
King Faisal University [ ] 1 Business School Management Department Finance Pre-MBA Dr Abdeldjelil Ferhat BOUDAH 1.
Money and Banking Lecture 11. Review of the Previous Lecture Application of Present Value Concept Internal Rate of Return Bond Pricing Real Vs Nominal.
ENERGY & CLIMATE ASSESSMENT TEAM National Risk Management Research Laboratory U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research.
CCS Roadmap People’s Republic of China: The business model for early stage demonstration projects Tony Wood International Team Leader Roadmap for CCS demonstration.
1 The role of innovation in climate change mitigation: new perspectives using the WITCH model V.Bosetti*, C.Carraro*, R.Duval**, M.Tavoni* * FEEM, ** OECD.
© OECD/IEA Do we have the technology to secure energy supply and CO 2 neutrality? Insights from Energy Technology Perspectives 2010 Copenhagen,
IEW 2009 Venice1 The Threat of Carbon Regulation & Business Hedging Strategy A. Golub ¹, S. Fuss ² J. Szolgayova ² & M. Obersteiner ² ¹ EDF, Washington.
Climate Change Scenarios Evaluated with MERGE-ETL and Technology Transfer Protocols S. Kypreos and H. Turton International Energy Workshop June ,
Flexible Global Climate Change Policy ESD.71 Application Portfolio: December 2009 Nidhi R. Santen Ph.D. Student, 2 nd Year Engineering Systems Division.
Environmental policy with uncertainty/imperfect information Price or quantity? M Weitzman, 1974, Prices vs quantities, RevEconstudies.
Dr. Gabrial Anandarajah, Dr. Neil Strachan King’s College London
Betül Özer, Erdem Görgün, Selahattin İncecik
Jon Sibley Director, Energy and Waste Policy
Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty
Saif Ullah Lecture Presentation Software to accompany Investment Analysis and.
1 Summary for Policymakers
1 Summary for Policymakers
1 Summary for Policymakers
1 Summary for Policymakers
Environmental Policy Mixes: Motivations, Evidence & Effectiveness
Joshua Linn (MIT and Resources for the Future)
California’s Clean Energy Future
Presentation transcript:

Climate Change Technology R&D Portfolio Analysis under Uncertainty Erin Baker, UMass Amherst Presented at The International Energy Workshop Venice, Italy June 18, 2009

2 What to do about climate change? What is the optimal path for a carbon tax and/or an emissions path?  Emissions taxes  Cap and trade  Emissions standards What is the optimal investment path in a portfolio of technology R&D projects?  Government funded R&D  R&D subsidies  Technology standards

3 Today’s Talk Background: Decision Making Under Uncertainty Motivation: Optimal R&D investment is impacted by:  The choice of R&D program (greener vs. cleaner);  The riskiness of R&D program; and  Uncertainty and learning about climate damages. Collecting and implementing data on R&D programs: a decision-analytic approach  Advanced Solar PVs, nuclear, CCS, batteries for vehicles Current Work: Optimal R&D portfolios  CCS & nuclear

4 Paradigm: Act – Learn – Act Question: How does uncertainty impact optimal near term actions? R&D Funding Technical Success Abatement Cost Curve Damage Curve Abatement Level Societal Cost

5 Optimal Abatement $ µ L0 = µ L1 µ L2 µ H0 µ H2 µ H1 Abatement MD H MAC MAC 2 MAC 1 MD L Technical change can reduce the cost of abatement PLUS change the optimal level of abatement

Collecting and implementing data on R&D programs: a decision-analytic approach This research is being supported by the Office of Science (BER) U.S. Department of Energy, Grant No.DE-FG02- 06ER64203 Baker, E., Chon, H. and Keisler, J. Carbon Capture and Storage: Applying Expert Elicitations to Inform Climate Policy. Revision under review at Climatic Change. Baker, E., Chon, H. and Keisler, J. Advanced Solar R&D: Applying Expert Elicitations to Inform Climate Policy. Energy Economics Forthcoming.

7 What is needed? What is the probability distribution over different outcomes of technical change? How will different technologies impact the MAC, if successful? R&D FUNDING TECH SUCCESS ABATEMENT CURVE DAMAGE CURVE ABATEMENT LEVEL SOCIETAL COST

8 Research Plan Collect Expert Assessments of Potential R&D Projects Determine Impact on MAC, using MiniCAM Develop portable representations of the probabilistic impact of technical change. MiniCAM calculations of impact on MAC probabilities Expert Elicitations MACs definitions of success Random Returns to R&D Baker, Chon, & Keisler (2007)

9 Comments on Elicitation results Other than nuclear, experts gave us relatively small budgets. We found considerable disagreement among experts  Optimists versus pessimists  Disagreement over cost targets  Fundamental technological disagreement The average expert is often close to the median expert

Probability distributions over MACs

11 Solar, free storage Nuclear Low Abatement Low R&D High R&D High Abatement abatement CCS Battery for vehicles Solar, Ref The expected MAC for different technologies

Current Work: Optimal R&D Portfolios

13 Issues to explore by using this data in policy models (DICE and a DA Portfolio Model) zero carbon coal & ccs biomass vehicles ? Interactions between individual technologies Increasing risk in damages vs. optimal portfolio Areas where riskier technologies are more attractive Impact of portfolio on optimal abatement Impact of portfolio’s risk on optimal abatement Robustness of portfolios Value of information on technical success

14 Mixed Integer Non-linear Stochastic Program Choose individual projects Success or not Abatement Cost Curve Three damages levels Abatement Level Societal Cost

15 Different Representations of Risk Zhigh1314 Pl02/313/14 Ph11/31/14 Abatement if Z high46%80%100% Z low is 0; optimal abatement is 0%

16 The optimal portfolio did not change with damage risk.

17 Nuclear dominates at large budgets

18 Total Social Cost

19 Total Social Cost In no- risk case, expected abatement cost INCREASES with R&D. The benefits are on the environmental side. In the high-risk case, the expected damages aren’t effected by R&D. All benefits are in cost reduction.

20 Total Social Cost High Chem Looping, Inorg. solar; & Nuc; Med post-comb; Low pre-comb Increase pre-comb to High.

21 The value of the portfolio depends on the risk level Moderate LWR. Reduce solar, increase pre-combustion to high

22 Some projects have very little value. pre-combustion med + organic Add 3 rd gen solar

23 The value of technology is non-monotonic in risk.

24 Moderate damages: technical change increases abatement, but increases cost of abatement

25 Medium high damages: technical change increases abatement and decreases cost of abatement

26 Increasing risk has an ambiguous effect on the value of R&D

27 Summary Expert Elicitations  A great deal of disagreement on emerging technologies. Impacts on the MAC  Nuclear and Solar w/storage are promising for low abatement levels  CCS is promising for high abatement levels  Batteries provide a steady benefit at all levels R&D Portfolio  Technology has less value when emissions are fixed.  CCS has more value when emissions are flexible  Very high risk favors: Technologies that reduce total cost (MAC is unimportant) Low risk technologies  Given current data, the optimal portfolio is robust to climate damages

Backup slides

29 Probability of success: CCS

30 National Academy Study The probability that CCS will be viable ranged from 66% to 77% in the NAS

31 Maximum Mean Central Minimum Probability a. Inorganic Low 2b. Inorg. Medium 1a. Organic Low 3. CIGS 4. 3 rd Gen. 1b. Organic High Probability of success: Solar PV

32

33 The expected MAC for different technologies. Investment NPV $38M; about $3.7M/yr for 15 years

34 The expected MAC for different technologies. Investment NPV $38M; about $3.7M/yr for 15 years

35 The expected MAC for different technologies. Investment NPV $2.2B; about $215M/yr for 15 years

36 The expected MAC for different technologies. Investment NPV $2.2B; about $215M/yr for 15 years

37 Solar, free storage Nuclear CCS Battery for vehicles Solar, Ref If we combine the CCS probabilities differently, they imply that a great deal of the benefit from CCS will accrue without any government R&D Low Abatement Very High R&D High Abatement Ref, no CCS

38 Conclusions Baker & Adu-Bonnah (2006) Optimal investment is significantly higher in R&D programs aimed at reducing the cost of low-carbon technologies when the program is riskier.  Policies should be aimed at increasing the probability of a breakthrough.  Investment in alternative technologies should be higher than deterministic studies would indicate.  Rationale for government policy, since private sector tends to be risk-averse.  Result is robust to many different probability distributions over climate damages.

39 Conclusions Baker & Adu-Bonnah (2006) The risk-profile of R&D programs aimed at reducing emissions in conventional technologies is largely unimportant.  Policies should be aimed at maximizing expected value of technical change.  Deterministic studies should give a good approximation of appropriate level of investment.  Less rationale for government policy.  If the probability of full abatement is high, then investment in risky program increases.

40 General Conclusions From Past Work Care should be taken in the representation of technical change in theoretical and applied environmental models  There is no general effect of technical change on the cost of abatement  In fact, environmental technical change may increase the marginal cost of abatement A portfolio of technologies should be modeled, with different impacts on the MAC We need more information about how improvements in real-world technologies impacts the MAC