1. Policies for Energy Technology Innovation Systems
Arnulf Grubler
IIASA & Yale University

2. Energy Technology Innovation
Energy technology innovation is the embodied result of institutionalized research, development and deployment efforts driven by collective learning processes involving both suppliers and users of technologies operating in specific contexts of 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 Transitions changeover 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
Draft, table will be replaced by graphic in final presentation

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

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

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

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

13. KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS ACTORS & INSTITUTIONS
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
resource inputs
public policy & leverage
RESOURCES
Directable (Activities)
Non-Directable (Outputs)
key
CLIMATE MITIGATION

14. KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS ACTORS & INSTITUTIONS
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
resource inputs
public policy & leverage
RESOURCES
Directable (Activities)
Non-Directable (Outputs)
key
supply : end-use
(relative effort)
CLIMATE MITIGATION

15. GEA Chapter 24 Authors and Resources
Case studies: TransitionstoNewTechnologies/CaseStudy_home.en.html
Related publications:
Gallagher, K.S., A. Grubler, L. Kuhl, G. Nemet, C. Wilson, The Energy Technology Innovation System. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37: doi: /annurev-environ Wilson, C., Grubler, A., Gallagher, K. S., Nemet, G.F., Marginalization of end-use technologies in energy innovation for climate protection. Nature Climate Change, 2(11), , doi: /nclimate A. Grubler and C. Wilson (eds.), Energy Technology Innovation: Learning from Historical Successes and Failures, Cambridge University Press (in press)