Expert elicitation of cost, performance, and RD&D budgets for coal power with CCS

AbstractThere is uncertainty about the ex-ante returns to research, development, and demonstration programs in the United States on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. To quantify this uncertainty, we conducted a written expert elicitation of thirteen experts in fossil power and CCS technologies from the government, academia, and the private sector. We asked experts to provide their recommended budget and allocation of RD&D funds by specific fossil power and CCS technology and type of RD&D activity (i.e. basic research, applied research, pilot plants, and demonstration plants) for the United States. The elicitation instrument was structured around estimating the cost and performance of coal-fired power plants with and without CCS in the years 2010 and 2030 under four funding scenarios for federal fossil energy RD&D in the USA. The most important areas identified for basic research were chemical looping combustion and membrane technology. The most important area for commercial demonstration was integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC). There was substantial disagreement between experts on both the current and future capital cost to build a new coal-fired power plant with CCS. There was also disagreement across experts as to whether the capital cost of a new coal plant with CCS would increase or decrease if federal RD&D funding stayed constant at current levels. However, there was a consensus among our experts that accelerated federal RD&D would (weakly) lower the capital cost requirements for a new coal plant with CCS. On average, experts estimated that if their recommended RD&D portfolio was implemented, the capital cost of new coal plants with CCS in 2030 would decrease by 10% in addition to the cost reductions/increases that would occur by 2030 through non-public RD&D related factors

Transforming energy innovation

Developing desperately needed new energy technologies will require not only an increase in funds but also a rethinking of the way government programs are designed and managed

Correction to Expert Judgments about RD&D and the Future of Nuclear Energy

Correction to Expert Judgments about RD&D and the Future of Nuclear Energ

Too Early to Pick Winners: Disagreement Across Experts Implies the Need to Diversify R&D Investment

Mitigating climate change will require innovation in energy technologies. Policy makers are faced with the question of how to promote this innovation, and whether to focus on a few technologies or to spread their bets. We present results on the extent to which public R&D might shape the future cost of energy technologies by 2030. We bring together three major expert elicitation efforts carried out by researchers at UMass Amherst, Harvard, and FEEM, covering nuclear, solar, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), bioelectricity, and biofuels. The results show experts believe that there will be decreasing returns to R&D and report median cost reductions around 20% for most of the technologies at the R&D budgets considered. Although the returns to solar and CCS R&D show some promise, the lack of consensus across studies, and the larger magnitude of the R&D investment involved in these technologies, calls for caution when defining what technologies would benefit the most from additional public R&D. Indeed, the wide divergence of opinions suggests that it is still too early to pick winners and that a broad portfolio of investments may be the best option