Diffusion of low-carbon technologies and the feasibility of long-term climate targets

被引:111
作者
Iyer, Gokul [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hultman, Nathan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Eom, Jiyong [4 ]
McJeon, Haewon [2 ,3 ]
Patel, Pralit [2 ,3 ]
Clarke, Leon [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Maryland, Sch Publ Policy, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
[2] Pacific NW Natl Lab, Joint Global Change Res Inst, 5825 Univ Res Court,Suite 3500, College Pk, MD 20740 USA
[3] Univ Maryland, College Pk, MD 20740 USA
[4] Sogang Univ, Grad Sch Management Technol, Seoul 121742, South Korea
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Climate change; Technology diffusion; Carbon-free energy; ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES; INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT; UNITED-KINGDOM; WIND ENERGY; STORAGE CCS; POLICY; CAPTURE; TRANSITION; DYNAMICS; BARRIERS;
D O I
10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.025
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Stabilizing the global climate will require large-scale global deployment of low-carbon technologies. Even in the presence of aggressive climate policies, however, the diffusion of such technologies may be limited by several institutional, behavioral, and social factors. In this paper, we review the literature on the sources of such diffusion constraints, and explore the potential implications of such constraints based on the GCAM integrated assessment model. Our analysis highlights that factors that limit technology deployment may have sizeable impacts on the feasibility and mitigation costs of achieving stringent stabilization targets. And such impacts are greatly amplified with major delays in serious climate policies. The results generally indicate that constraints on the expansions of CCS and renewables are more costly than those on nuclear or bioenergy, and jointly constraining these technologies leaves some scenarios infeasible. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:103 / 118
页数:16
相关论文
共 76 条
[61]   INVESTMENT UNDER UNCERTAINTY - DIXIT,AK, PINDYCK,RS [J].
SCHWARTZ, ES .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 1994, 49 (05) :1924-1928
[62]   Drivers and barriers towards large scale Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment and possible government responses Current insights from the Dutch perspective [J].
Slagter, Marten W. ;
Wellenstein, Edmund .
10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES, 2011, 4 :5738-5743
[63]   The intermittency of wind, solar, and renewable electricity generators: Technical barrier or rhetorical excuse? [J].
Sovacool, Benjamin K. .
UTILITIES POLICY, 2009, 17 (3-4) :288-296
[64]   TECHNOLOGY DIFFUSION AND PUBLIC-POLICY [J].
STONEMAN, P ;
DIEDEREN, P .
ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1994, 104 (425) :918-930
[65]   The value of technology and of its evolution towards a low carbon economy [J].
Tavoni, Massimo ;
De Cian, Enrica ;
Luderer, Gunnar ;
Steckel, Jan Christoph ;
Waisman, Henri .
CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2012, 114 (01) :39-57
[66]  
Taylor MargaretR., 2005, LAW POLICY, V27, P348, DOI [10.1111/j.1467-9930.2005.00203.x, DOI 10.1111/J.1467-9930.2005.00203.X]
[67]  
Train K.E., 1993, QUALITATIVE CHOICE A
[68]   Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales [J].
Upreti, BR .
ENERGY POLICY, 2004, 32 (06) :785-800
[69]   Nuclear energy: Tenfold expansion or phase-out? [J].
van der Zwaan, BCC .
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2002, 69 (03) :287-307
[70]   Entrapment in large technology systems: institutional commitment and power relations [J].
Walker, W .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2000, 29 (7-8) :833-846