CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 513

Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition

Way, Rupert, Ives, Matthew C., Mealy, Penny, Farmer, J. Doyne·2022·Joule
DOI 10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.009

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. [2]2. Creutzig, F. ∙ Agoston, P. ∙ Goldschmidt, J.C. ... The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change Nat. Energy. 2017; 2, 17140 Crossref Scopus (572) Google Scholar
  2. [3]3. Xiao, M. ∙ Junne, T. ∙ Haas, J. ... Plummeting costs of renewables - are energy scenarios lagging? Energy Strategy Rev. 2021; 35, 100636 Crossref Scopus (73) Google Scholar
  3. [4]4. Jaxa-Rozen, M. ∙ Trutnevyte, E. Sources of uncertainty in long-term global scenarios of solar photovoltaic technology Nat. Clim. Change. 2021; 11:266-273 Crossref Scopus (81) Google Scholar
  4. [5]5. Hoekstra, Auke ∙ Steinbuch, M. ∙ Verbong, G. Creating agent-based energy transition management models that can uncover profitable pathways to climate change mitigation Complexity. 2017; 2017:1-23 Crossref Scopus (49) Google Scholar
  5. [6]6. Shiraki, H. ∙ Sugiyama, M. Back to the basic: toward improvement of technoeconomic representation in integrated assessment models Clim. Change. 2020; 162:13-24 Crossref Scopus (19) Google Scholar
  6. [7]7. Victoria, M. ∙ Haegel, N. ∙ Peters, I.M. ... Solar photovoltaics is ready to power a sustainable future Joule. 2021; 5:1041-1056 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (296) Google Scholar
  7. [8]8. Stern, N. Economics: current climate models are grossly misleading Nature. 2016; 530:407-409 Crossref Scopus (195) PubMed Google Scholar
  8. [9]9. Pindyck, R.S. Climate change policy: what do the models tell us? J. Econ. Lit. 2013; 51:860-872 Crossref Scopus (508) Google Scholar
  9. [10]10. Farmer, J.D. ∙ Hepburn, C. ∙ Mealy, P. ... A third wave in the economics of climate change Environ. Resour. Econ. 2015; 62:329-357 Crossref Scopus (160) Google Scholar
  10. [11]11. Gambhir, A. ∙ Butnar, I. ∙ Li, P.-H. ... A review of criticisms of integrated assessment models and proposed approaches to address these, through the lens of beccs Energies. 2019; 12:1747 Crossref Scopus (126) Google Scholar
  11. [12]12. McCollum, D.L. ∙ Gambhir, A. ∙ Rogelj, J. ... Energy modellers should explore extremes more systematically in scenarios Nat. Energy. 2020; 5:104-107 Crossref Scopus (72) Google Scholar
  12. [13]13. Lovins, A.B. ∙ Ürge-Vorsatz, D. ∙ Mundaca, L. ... Recalibrating climate prospects Environ. Res. Lett. 2019; 14, 120201 Crossref Scopus (21) Google Scholar
  13. [14]14. Pye, S. ∙ Broad, O. ∙ Bataille, C. ... Modelling net-zero emissions energy systems requires a change in approach Clim. Policy. 2021; 21:222-231 Crossref Scopus (89) Google Scholar
  14. [15]15. Stern, N. ∙ Stiglitz, J.E. ∙ Taylor, C. The economics of immense risk, urgent action and radical change: towards new approaches to the economics of climate change J. Econ. Methodol. 2021; 29:1-36 Google Scholar
  15. [17]17. Victoria, M. ∙ Zhu, K. ∙ Brown, T. ... Early decarbonisation of the European energy system pays off Nat. Commun. 2020; 11:6223 Crossref Scopus (136) PubMed Google Scholar
  16. [18]18. He, G. ∙ Lin, J. ∙ Sifuentes, F. ... Rapid cost decrease of renewables and storage accelerates the decarbonization of china’s power system Nat. Commun. 2020; 11:2486 Crossref Scopus (230) PubMed Google Scholar
  17. [19]19. Bogdanov, D. ∙ Ram, M. ∙ Aghahosseini, A. ... Low-cost renewable electricity as the key driver of the global energy transition towards sustainability Energy. 2021; 227, 120467 Crossref Scopus (438) Google Scholar
  18. [20]20. Arthur, W.B. The Nature of Technology. What It Is and How It Evolves Free Press, 2011 Google Scholar
  19. [22]22. Grübler, A. ∙ Nakićenović, N. ∙ Victor, D.G. Dynamics of energy technologies and global change Energy Policy. 1999; 27:247-280 Crossref Scopus (518) Google Scholar
  20. [23]23. Koh, Heebyung ∙ Magee, C.L. A functional approach for studying technological progress: application to information technology Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change. 2006; 73:1061-1083 Crossref Scopus (105) Google Scholar
  21. [24]24. Koh, H. ∙ Magee, C.L. A functional approach for studying technological progress: extension to energy technology Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change. 2008; 75:735-758 Crossref Scopus (70) Google Scholar
  22. [25]25. Nagy, B. ∙ Farmer, J.D. ∙ Bui, Q.M. ... Statistical basis for predicting technological progress PLoS One. 2013; 8, e52669 Crossref Scopus (177) Google Scholar
  23. [27]27. Trancik, J.E. ∙ Jean, J. ∙ Kavlak, G. ... Technology Improvement and Emissions Reductions as Mutually Reinforcing Efforts: Observations from the Global Development of Solar and Wind Energy. Working paper MIT Press, 2015 Google Scholar
  24. [28]28. Reiner, D.M. Learning through a portfolio of carbon capture and storage demonstration projects Nat. Energy. 2016; 1:1-7 Crossref Scopus (190) Google Scholar
  25. [29]29. Rubin, E.S. ∙ Davison, J.E. ∙ Herzog, H.J. The cost of CO2 capture and storage Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control. 2015; 40:378-400 Special Issue commemorating the 10th year anniversary of the publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on CO2 Capture and Storage Crossref Scopus (674) Google Scholar
  26. [31]31. Pindyck, R.S. The long-run evolution of energy prices Energy J. 1999; 20, 19449089 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41322828 Crossref Google Scholar
  27. [32]32. Shafiee, S. ∙ Topal, E. A long-term view of worldwide fossil fuel prices Appl. Energy. 2010; 87:988-1000 Crossref Scopus (95) Google Scholar
  28. [33]33. Farmer, J.D. ∙ Lafond, F. How predictable is technological progress? Res. Policy. 2016; 45:647-665 Crossref Scopus (170) Google Scholar
  29. [34]34. Moore, G.E. Cramming more components onto integrated circuits Proc. IEEE. 1998; 86:82-85 Crossref Scopus (1406) Google Scholar
  30. [35]35. Wright, T.P. Factors affecting the cost of airplanes J. Aeronaut. Sci. 1936; 3:122-128 Crossref Google Scholar
  31. [36]36. Thompson, P. The relationship between unit cost and cumulative quantity and the evidence for organizational learning-by-doing J. Econ. Perspect. 2012; 26:203-224 Crossref Scopus (57) Google Scholar
  32. [37]37. Witajewski-Baltvilks, J. ∙ Verdolini, E. ∙ Tavoni, M. Bending the learning curve Energy Econ. 2015; 52:S86-S99 Crossref Scopus (20) Google Scholar
  33. [38]38. Alberth, S. Forecasting technology costs via the experience curve—myth or magic? Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change. 2008; 75:952-983 Crossref Scopus (52) Google Scholar
  34. [39]39. Lafond, F. ∙ Bailey, A.G. ∙ Bakker, J.D. ... How well do experience curves predict technological progress? a method for making distributional forecasts Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change. 2018; 128:104-117 Crossref Scopus (39) Google Scholar
  35. [40]40. IPCC Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working Group III to the sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change Cambridge University Press, 2022 Google Scholar
  36. [42]42. Krey, V. ∙ Guo, F. ∙ Kolp, P. ... Looking under the hood: a comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models Energy. 2019; 172:1254-1267 Crossref Scopus (109) Google Scholar
  37. [44]44. Ferguson, C.D. ∙ Marburger, L.E. ∙ Doyne Farmer, J.D. ... A US nuclear future? Nature. 2010; 467:391-393 Crossref Scopus (9) PubMed Google Scholar
  38. [45]45. Wilson, C. ∙ Grubler, A. ∙ Bauer, N. ... Future capacity growth of energy technologies: are scenarios consistent with historical evidence? Clim. Change. 2013; 118:381-395 Crossref Scopus (101) Google Scholar
  39. [46]46. Anandarajah, G. ∙ McDowall, W. ∙ Ekins, P. Decarbonising road transport with hydrogen and electricity: long term global technology learning scenarios Int. J. Hydr. Energy. 2013; 38:3419-3432 Crossref Scopus (120) Google Scholar
  40. [47]47. Heuberger, C.F. ∙ Rubin, E.S. ∙ Staffell, I. ... Power capacity expansion planning considering endogenous technology cost learning Appl. Energy. 2017; 204:831-845 Crossref Scopus (129) Google Scholar
  41. [48]48. DeCarolis, J. ∙ Daly, H. ∙ Dodds, P. ... Formalizing best practice for energy system optimization modelling Appl. Energy. 2017; 194:184-198 Crossref Scopus (239) Google Scholar
  42. [49]49. Fricko, O. ∙ Havlik, P. ∙ Rogelj, J. ... The marker quantification of the shared socioeconomic pathway 2: a middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century Global Environ. Change. 2017; 42:251-267 Crossref Scopus (603) Google Scholar
  43. [50]50. Gritsevskyi, A. ∙ Nakićenovi, N. Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change Energy Policy. 2000; 28:907-921 Crossref Scopus (159) Google Scholar
  44. [51]51. Trutnevyte, E. Does cost optimization approximate the real-world energy transition? Energy. 2016; 106:182-193 Crossref Scopus (143) Google Scholar
  45. [53]53. Brown, T. ∙ Schlachtberger, D. ∙ Kies, A. ... Synergies of sector coupling and transmission reinforcement in a cost-optimised, highly renewable European energy system Energy. 2018; 160:720-739 Crossref Scopus (414) Google Scholar
  46. [54]54. Eyre, N. Energy efficiency in the energy transition European Council for an Energy Efficient Economy Summer Study Proceedings, 2019 247-254 Google Scholar
  47. [55]55. McNerney, J. ∙ Doyne Farmer, J. ∙ Trancik, J.E. Historical costs of coal-fired electricity and implications for the future Energy Policy. 2011; 39:3042-3054 Crossref Scopus (68) Google Scholar
  48. [56]56. Krey, V. Global energy-climate scenarios and models: a review WIREs Energy Environ. 2014; 3:363-383 Crossref Scopus (91) Google Scholar
  49. [57]57. Edenhofer, O. ∙ Lessmann, K. ∙ Kemfert, C. ... Induced technological change: exploring its implications for the economics of atmospheric stabilization: synthesis report from the innovation modeling comparison project Energy J. 2006; SI2006, 19449089 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23297057 Crossref Google Scholar
  50. [58]58. Nordhaus, W.D. Revisiting the social cost of carbon Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2017; 114:1518-1523 Crossref Scopus (691) PubMed Google Scholar
  51. [59]59. Broome, J. The ethics of climate change Sci. Am. 2008; 298:96-102 http://www.jstor.org/stable/26000646 Crossref Scopus (104) PubMed Google Scholar
  52. [60]60. Stern, N. The Economics of Climate Change: the Stern Review Cambridge University Press, 2007 Crossref Scopus (6815) Google Scholar
  53. [62]62. Lowe, R.J. ∙ Drummond, P. Solar, wind and logistic substitution in global energy supply to 2050 – barriers and implications Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022; 153, 111720 Crossref Scopus (84) PubMed Google Scholar
  54. [63]63. Mercure, J.-F. ∙ Pollitt, H. ∙ Viñuales, J.E. ... Macroeconomic impact of stranded fossil fuel assets Nat. Clim. Change. 2018; 8:588-593 Crossref Scopus (236) Google Scholar
  55. [64]64. McNerney, J. ∙ Farmer, J.D. ∙ Redner, S. ... Role of design complexity in technology improvement Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2011; 108:9008-9013 Crossref Scopus (108) PubMed Google Scholar
  56. [65]65. Wilson, C. ∙ Grubler, A. ∙ Bento, N. ... Granular technologies to accelerate decarbonization Science. 2020; 368:36-39 Crossref Scopus (116) PubMed Google Scholar
  57. [66]66. Verdolini, E. ∙ Anadón, L.D. ∙ Baker, E. ... Future prospects for energy technologies: insights from expert elicitations Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy. 2018; 12:133-153 Crossref Scopus (51) Google Scholar
  58. [67]67. Meng, J. ∙ Way, R. ∙ Verdolini, E. ... Comparing expert elicitation and model-based probabilistic technology cost forecasts for the energy transition Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2021; 118, e1917165118 Crossref Scopus (40) Google Scholar
  59. [68]68. Zimm, C. ∙ Goldemberg, J. ∙ Nakicenovic, N. ... Is the renewables transformation a piece of cake or a pie in the sky? Energy Strategy Rev. 2019; 26, 100401 Crossref Scopus (7) Google Scholar
  60. [69]69. Grubb, M. ∙ Wieners, C. ∙ Yang, P. Modeling myths: on dice and dynamic realism in integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation WIREs Clim. Change. 2021; 12:e698 Crossref Scopus (26) Google Scholar
  61. [70]70. Köberle, A.C. ∙ Vandyck, T. ∙ Guivarch, C. ... The cost of mitigation revisited Nat. Clim. Change. 2021; 11:1035-1045 Crossref Scopus (37) Google Scholar
  62. [71]71. Luderer, G. ∙ Madeddu, S. ∙ Merfort, L. ... Impact of declining renewable energy costs on electrification in low-emission scenarios Nat. Energy. 2022; 7:32-42 Crossref Scopus (210) Google Scholar
  63. [72]72. Way, R. ∙ Lafond, F. ∙ Lillo, F. ... Wright meets Markowitz: how standard portfolio theory changes when assets are technologies following experience curves J. Econ. Dyn. Control. 2019; 101:211-238 Crossref Scopus (23) Google Scholar
  64. [73]73. Pindyck, R.S. The social cost of carbon revisited J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2019; 94:140-160 Crossref Scopus (121) Google Scholar
  65. [74]74. Kikstra, J.S. ∙ Waidelich, P. ∙ Rising, J. ... The social cost of carbon dioxide under climate-economy feedbacks and temperature variability Environ. Res. Lett. 2021; 16, 094037 Crossref Scopus (55) Google Scholar
  66. [75]75. Aldy, J.E. ∙ Kotchen, M.J. ∙ Stavins, R.N. ... Keep climate policy focused on the social cost of carbon Science. 2021; 373:850-852 Crossref Scopus (42) PubMed Google Scholar
  67. [78]78. Ziegler, M.S. ∙ Trancik, J.E. Re-examining rates of lithium-ion battery technology improvement and cost decline Energy Environ. Sci. 2021; 14:1635-1651 Crossref Google Scholar
  68. [80]80. Tong, D. ∙ Farnham, D.J. ∙ Duan, L. ... Geophysical constraints on the reliability of solar and wind power worldwide Nat. Commun. 2021; 12:6146 Crossref Scopus (106) PubMed Google Scholar
  69. [82]82. BP BP Statistical Review of World Energy. Technical report BP plc, 2021 Google Scholar

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Way, R., Ives, M. C., Mealy, P., & Farmer, J. D.
Venue
Joule
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-09
Volume
6
Issue
9
Pages
2057-2082
ISSN
2542-4351
DOI
10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.009
Cited by
513
References
3
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Children's Investment Fund Foundation
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
  • Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, UK Government
  • Horizon 2020 (730427)
  • Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford (LDR00530)
  • Institute for New Economic Thinking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review