|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
181802
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement have ushered in a new era of policymaking to deliver on the formulated goals. Energy policies are key to ensuring universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy (SDG7). Yet they can also have considerable impact on other goals. To successfully achieve multiple goals concurrently, policies need to balance different objectives and manage their interactions. Refining previously contemplated design principles, we identify three key principles - complementary, transparency and adaptability - as highly pertinent for multiple-objective energy policies based on a synthesis of seventeen coordinated policy case studies. First, policies should entail complementary measures and design provisions that specifically target non-energy objectives (complementarity). Second, policy impacts should be tracked comprehensively in both energy and non-energy domains to uncover diminishing returns and facilitate policy learning (transparency). Third, policies should be capable of adapting to changing objectives over time (adaptability). These principles are rarely considered in current policies, implying the need to mainstream them into the next generation of policymaking by pointing to best practices and new tools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
096710
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The German electricity sector has recently seen extensive planning and construction of new coal-fired power plants. Within a period of only a few years, new investments amounting to around 15% of the total sector capacity were brought on the way, and plans for a multitude of additional projects are pending. This 'dash for coal' in Germany has raised considerable public concern, especially as it risks to undermine recent political attempts to combat global warming. Yet, the question of why the dash for coal has emerged has not yet been addressed in a thorough analysis. This article attempts to close this research gap, while at the same time contributing as a case study to the general understanding of investment patterns in liberalized electricity markets. It finds that the main reasons for the dash have been (1) replacement requirements due to the nuclear phase out, (2) the onset of a new investment cycle in the power market, (3) favorable economic and technological prospects for coal compared with natural gas in the long run, (4) a status-quo bias of investors in regard to future renewable deployment, (5) explicit political support for coal, and (6) the ineffectiveness of public protest in hampering new projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
097498
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The German electricity sector has recently seen extensive planning and construction of new coal-fired power plants. Within a period of only a few years, new investments amounting to around 15% of the total sector capacity were brought on the way, and plans for a multitude of additional projects are pending. This 'dash for coal' in Germany has raised considerable public concern, especially as it risks to undermine recent political attempts to combat global warming. Yet, the question of why the dash for coal has emerged has not yet been addressed in a thorough analysis. This article attempts to close this research gap, while at the same time contributing as a case study to the general understanding of investment patterns in liberalized electricity markets. It finds that the main reasons for the dash have been (1) replacement requirements due to the nuclear phase out, (2) the onset of a new investment cycle in the power market, (3) favorable economic and technological prospects for coal compared with natural gas in the long run, (4) a status-quo bias of investors in regard to future renewable deployment, (5) explicit political support for coal, and (6) the ineffectiveness of public protest in hampering new projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
103332
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite political activities to foster a low-carbon energy transition, Germany currently sees a considerable number of new coal power plants being added to its power mix. There are several possible drivers for this "dash for coal", but it is widely accepted that windfall profits gained through free allocation of ETS certificates play an important role. Yet the quantification of allocation-related investment distortions has been limited to back-of-the envelope calculations and stylized models so far. We close this gap with a numerical model integrating both Germany's particular allocation rules and its specific power generation structure. We find that technology specific new entrant provisions have substantially increased incentives to invest in hard coal plants red to natural gas at the time of the ETS onset. More precisely, disproportionate windfall profits compared more than half the total capital costs of a hard coal plant. Moreover, shorter periods of free allocations would not have turned investors' favours towards the cleaner natural gas technology because of pre-existing economic advantages for coal. In contrast, full auctioning of permits or a single best available technology benchmark would have made natural gas the predominant technology of choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
125628
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
German energy policy targets envision a share of electricity from renewable energy sources (RES-E) of at least 80% in 2050. How can the transformation of the German electricity sector be achieved and at what costs? This paper addresses these questions by means of a meta-analysis of 10 recent model-based mitigation scenarios for Germany. It turns out that the scenarios exploit the three basic strategic options of increasing the share of RES-E - domestic RES-E generation, electricity demand reductions, and RES-E imports - to substantially different extents. Domestic RES-E generation increases in all scenarios, particularly from onshore and offshore wind. Scenarios that rely heavily on reducing electricity demand require a relatively low expansion of domestic RES-E generation. Despite detailed technical analyses, insights on the costs of the transformation remain limited. A discussion of underlying scenario assumptions reveals that it is unclear whether (i) RES-E and system integration technology development will be as cost-competitive as postulated, (ii) implicitly assumed institutional requirements will be realized, and (iii) relevant actors in the transformation process will be incentivized accordingly. Therefore, future research should pursue a thorough assessment of strategic options for transforming the German electricity system that consistently integrates technologies, institutions, and actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
150734
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In 2010, Germany agreed a plan to increase the share of renewables in power consumption to 80% by 2050, and in 2011 the decision was taken to phase-out nuclear power by 2022. This policy is now widely known as the “Energiewende”. While many global observers consider this program to be primarily driven by the need to tackle climate change, the precise political goals of the Energiewende are, by and large, unclear. In our study we compiled a list of 14 goals put forward in political debates and conducted a “mapping” survey among more than 50 policy experts. We asked them to prioritize the goals based on their personal views and provide arguments for their rankings in ensuing interviews. Our main findings are as follows: (i) a large majority named climate protection among the top-level goals of the Energiewende; at the same time, around 80% of all participants also identified additional goals; (ii) when asked if the Energiewende would make sense even if climate change did not exist, two thirds of the participants agreed, which, when taken with the first finding, demonstrates that the goals and motivations driving the Energiewende are more complex than often assumed. We conclude that for the sake of effective and efficient policies and ever rising climate policy ambition, a public debate and clear specification of the top-level goals are indispensable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|