skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models

Abstract

Integrated assessment models are extensively used in the analysis of climate change mitigation and are informing national decision makers as well as contribute to international assessments such as those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This paper conducts a comprehensive review of techno-economic assumptions in the electricity sector among sixteen different global and national integrated assessment models. Particular focus is given to six major economies in the world: Brazil, China, the EU, India, Japan and the US. The comparison reveals that techno-economic characteristics are quite different across integrated assessment models, both for the base year and future years. It is, however, important to recognize that techno-economic assessments from the literature exhibit an equally large range of parameters as the integrated assessment models reviewed. Beyond numerical differences, the representation of technologies also differs among models which needs to be taken into account when comparing numerical parameters. While desirable from a first principles perspective and often called for, it seems difficult to fully harmonize techno-economic parameters across a broader range of models due to structural differences in the representation of technology. Therefore, in the future making techno-economic parameters available together with of the technology representation as well as the exact definitionsmore » of the parameters should become the standard approach as it allows an open discussion of appropriate assumptions.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [5];  [6];  [7];  [8];  [9];  [10]; ORCiD logo [11];  [12];  [13];  [14];  [15];  [16];  [17];  [18];  [15] more »; ORCiD logo [11];  [19];  [20];  [21];  [22];  [23];  [6];  [6];  [24];  [25];  [26];  [27] « less
  1. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
  2. IIASA
  3. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Austria
  4. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
  5. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)
  6. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts
  7. PBL
  8. University of Athens
  9. NIES, Japan
  10. ERI
  11. BATTELLE (PACIFIC NW LAB)
  12. European Commission – JRC
  13. COPPE/UFRJ
  14. Mizuho Information & Research Institute, Inc.
  15. FEEM
  16. RITE
  17. Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad
  18. National Technical University of Athens (NTUA),
  19. Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad
  20. Universiteit Utrecht
  21. ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  22. ICCS
  23. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS)
  24. The Energy Resources Institute, New Delhi
  25. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
  26. Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth
  27. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1578090
Report Number(s):
PNNL-ACT-SA-10389
DOE Contract Number:  
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Energy
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 172
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Krey, Volker, Guo, Fei, Kolp, Peter, Zhou, Wenji, Schaeffer, Roberto, Awasthy, Aayushi, Bertram, Christoph, Sytze de Boer, Harmen, Fragkos, Panagiotis, Fujimori, Shinichiro, He, Chenmin, Iyer, Gokul C., Keramidas, Kimon, Koberle, Alex, Oshiro, Ken, Reis, Lara, Shoai-Tehrani, Bianka, Vishwanathan, Saritha S., Capros, Pantelis, Drouet, Laurent, Edmonds, James A., Garg, Amit, Gernaat, David, Jiang, Kejun, Kannavou, Maria, Kitous, Alban, Kriegler, Elmar, Luderer, Gunnar, Mathur, Ritu, Muratori, Matteo, Sano, Fuminori, and Van Vuuren, Detlef. Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models. United States: N. p., 2019. Web. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.131.
Krey, Volker, Guo, Fei, Kolp, Peter, Zhou, Wenji, Schaeffer, Roberto, Awasthy, Aayushi, Bertram, Christoph, Sytze de Boer, Harmen, Fragkos, Panagiotis, Fujimori, Shinichiro, He, Chenmin, Iyer, Gokul C., Keramidas, Kimon, Koberle, Alex, Oshiro, Ken, Reis, Lara, Shoai-Tehrani, Bianka, Vishwanathan, Saritha S., Capros, Pantelis, Drouet, Laurent, Edmonds, James A., Garg, Amit, Gernaat, David, Jiang, Kejun, Kannavou, Maria, Kitous, Alban, Kriegler, Elmar, Luderer, Gunnar, Mathur, Ritu, Muratori, Matteo, Sano, Fuminori, & Van Vuuren, Detlef. Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models. United States. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.131.
Krey, Volker, Guo, Fei, Kolp, Peter, Zhou, Wenji, Schaeffer, Roberto, Awasthy, Aayushi, Bertram, Christoph, Sytze de Boer, Harmen, Fragkos, Panagiotis, Fujimori, Shinichiro, He, Chenmin, Iyer, Gokul C., Keramidas, Kimon, Koberle, Alex, Oshiro, Ken, Reis, Lara, Shoai-Tehrani, Bianka, Vishwanathan, Saritha S., Capros, Pantelis, Drouet, Laurent, Edmonds, James A., Garg, Amit, Gernaat, David, Jiang, Kejun, Kannavou, Maria, Kitous, Alban, Kriegler, Elmar, Luderer, Gunnar, Mathur, Ritu, Muratori, Matteo, Sano, Fuminori, and Van Vuuren, Detlef. Mon . "Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models". United States. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.131.
@article{osti_1578090,
title = {Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models},
author = {Krey, Volker and Guo, Fei and Kolp, Peter and Zhou, Wenji and Schaeffer, Roberto and Awasthy, Aayushi and Bertram, Christoph and Sytze de Boer, Harmen and Fragkos, Panagiotis and Fujimori, Shinichiro and He, Chenmin and Iyer, Gokul C. and Keramidas, Kimon and Koberle, Alex and Oshiro, Ken and Reis, Lara and Shoai-Tehrani, Bianka and Vishwanathan, Saritha S. and Capros, Pantelis and Drouet, Laurent and Edmonds, James A. and Garg, Amit and Gernaat, David and Jiang, Kejun and Kannavou, Maria and Kitous, Alban and Kriegler, Elmar and Luderer, Gunnar and Mathur, Ritu and Muratori, Matteo and Sano, Fuminori and Van Vuuren, Detlef},
abstractNote = {Integrated assessment models are extensively used in the analysis of climate change mitigation and are informing national decision makers as well as contribute to international assessments such as those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This paper conducts a comprehensive review of techno-economic assumptions in the electricity sector among sixteen different global and national integrated assessment models. Particular focus is given to six major economies in the world: Brazil, China, the EU, India, Japan and the US. The comparison reveals that techno-economic characteristics are quite different across integrated assessment models, both for the base year and future years. It is, however, important to recognize that techno-economic assessments from the literature exhibit an equally large range of parameters as the integrated assessment models reviewed. Beyond numerical differences, the representation of technologies also differs among models which needs to be taken into account when comparing numerical parameters. While desirable from a first principles perspective and often called for, it seems difficult to fully harmonize techno-economic parameters across a broader range of models due to structural differences in the representation of technology. Therefore, in the future making techno-economic parameters available together with of the technology representation as well as the exact definitions of the parameters should become the standard approach as it allows an open discussion of appropriate assumptions.},
doi = {10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.131},
journal = {Energy},
number = ,
volume = 172,
place = {United States},
year = {2019},
month = {4}
}

Works referencing / citing this record:

A Review of Criticisms of Integrated Assessment Models and Proposed Approaches to Address These, through the Lens of BECCS
journal, May 2019

  • Gambhir, Ajay; Butnar, Isabela; Li, Pei-Hao
  • Energies, Vol. 12, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.3390/en12091747