How clean is clean? Incremental versus radical technological change in coal-fired power plants

In the discussion on innovations for sustainable development, radical innovations are frequently called for in order that the transformation of society to a system perceived as sustainable can succeed. The reason given for this is the greater environmental efficiency of these innovations. This hypothesis is, however, not supported by empirical evidence. Against the background of a globally increasing use of coal-burning power plants and the environmental impacts to be expected, the hypothesis that radical innovations are superior to incremental innovations is reviewed on the basis of fossil fuel power plants. This paper examines the diffusion of incremental and radical innovations in the field of power plants and the basic obstacles with which these innovations were confronted. To give an example, Pressurised Pulverised Coal Combustion (PPCC) as a radical innovation and supercritical coal-fired power plants as an incremental innovation are compared. An ex-post analysis of the German R&D portfolio in the past three decades in the field of power plants environmentally shows that technologies which were radical innovations had great difficulties in becoming accepted by possible investors. The future potential of radical innovations in the field of power plant technology is to be regarded as relatively low, especially due to comparatively high cost-pressure, the reluctance of utilities to take risks and the temporal dynamics of technological progress facilitating incremental innovations on the basis of conventional reference technology. The conclusion for future R&D work in the sector of large-scale power plants is that an innovation is more likely to succeed the more it follows established technological trajectories. In the context of energy market liberalisation, hardly any radical innovations are expected in this field of technology. The findings of this paper may also be helpful in evaluating risks or probabilities of success of technologies being developed. As an example technological trajectories currently favoured in CO2 capture are discussed. --Radical innovations,incremental innovations,carbon capture storage,coal power plants

Impact of different time series aggregation methods on optimal energy system design

Modelling renewable energy systems is a computationally-demanding task due to the high fluctuation of supply and demand time series. To reduce the scale of these, this paper discusses different methods for their aggregation into typical periods. Each aggregation method is applied to a different type of energy system model, making the methods fairly incomparable. To overcome this, the different aggregation methods are first extended so that they can be applied to all types of multidimensional time series and then compared by applying them to different energy system configurations and analyzing their impact on the cost optimal design. It was found that regardless of the method, time series aggregation allows for significantly reduced computational resources. Nevertheless, averaged values lead to underestimation of the real system cost in comparison to the use of representative periods from the original time series. The aggregation method itself, e.g. k means clustering, plays a minor role. More significant is the system considered: Energy systems utilizing centralized resources require fewer typical periods for a feasible system design in comparison to systems with a higher share of renewable feed-in. Furthermore, for energy systems based on seasonal storage, currently existing models integration of typical periods is not suitable

Inkrementelle versus radikale Innovationen am Beispiel der Kraftwerkstechnik

In der Diskussion um Innovationen für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung werden häufig radikale Innovationen gefordert, damit die Transformation der Gesellschaft hin zu einem als nachhaltig empfundenen System gelingen kann. Begründet wird dies mit einer höheren Umwelteffizienz dieser Innovationen. Empirische Evidenz für diese Hypothese ist allerdings kaum zu finden. Dieses Papier prüft vor dem Hintergrund eines weltweit zunehmenden Einsatzes von Kohlekraftwerken und der dadurch zu erwarteten Umweltbelastungen die Hypothese, dass radikale Innovationen im Vergleich zu inkrementellen Innovationen überlegen sind. Anhand von Beispielen fossil befeuerter Kraftwerke wird untersucht, inwieweit sich radikale Innovationen im Kraftwerksbereich bisher durchsetzen konnten bzw. welche Hemmnisse ihnen grundsätzlich entgegenstanden. Hierzu werden u.a. die Druckkohlenstaubfeuerung als radikale Innovation und überkritische Kohlekraftwerke als inkrementelle Innovation miteinander verglichen. Anhand einer Ex-Post Analyse lässt sich für den Kraftwerksbereich zeigen, dass sich umweltfreundliche Techniken, die radikale Neuerungen darstellen, nur sehr schwer durchsetzen konnten. Die Zukunftspotenziale für radikale Innovationen auf dem Gebiet der Kraftwerkstechnik sind insbesondere aufgrund des relativ hohen Kostendrucks, der geringen Risikobereitschaft von Energieversorgungsunternehmen und der großen zeitlichen Dynamik des inkrementellen Fortschritts bei konventionellen Referenztechnologien als relativ gering anzusehen. Für zukünftige F&E-Arbeiten auf dem großtechnischen Kraftwerkssektor lässt sich folgern, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Erfolgs einer Neuentwicklung umso größer ist, je näher sie sich an den etablierten Techniklinien orientiert. Auch im Zuge der Energiemarktliberalisierung sind für diesen Technikbereich kaum radikale Neuerungen zu erwarten

How clean is clean? : incremental versus radical technological change in coal-fired power plants

In the discussion on innovations for sustainable development, radical innovations are frequently called for in order that the transformation of society to a system perceived as sustainable can succeed. The reason given for this is the greater environmental efficiency of these innovations. This hypothesis is, however, not supported by empirical evidence. Against the background of a globally increasing use of coal-burning power plants and the environmental impacts to be expected, the hypothesis that radical innovations are superior to incremental innovations is reviewed on the basis of fossil fuel power plants. This paper examines the diffusion of incremental and radical innovations in the field of power plants and the basic obstacles with which these innovations were confronted. To give an example, Pressurised Pulverised Coal Combustion (PPCC) as a radical innovation and supercritical coal-fired power plants as an incremental innovation are compared. An ex-post analysis of the German R&D portfolio in the past three decades in the field of power plants environmentally shows that technologies which were radical innovations had great difficulties in becoming accepted by possible investors. The future potential of radical innovations in the field of power plant technology is to be regarded as relatively low, especially due to comparatively high cost-pressure, the reluctance of utilities to take risks and the temporal dynamics of technological progress facilitating incremental innovations on the basis of conventional reference technology. The conclusion for future R&D work in the sector of large-scale power plants is that an innovation is more likely to succeed the more it follows established technological trajectories. In the context of energy market liberalisation, hardly any radical innovations are expected in this field of technology. The findings of this paper may also be helpful in evaluating risks or probabilities of success of technologies being developed. As an example technological trajectories currently favoured in CO2 capture are discussed

Inkrementelle versus radikale Innovationen am Beispiel der Kraftwerkstechnik

In der Diskussion um Innovationen für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung werden häufig radikale Innovationen gefordert, damit die Transformation der Gesellschaft hin zu einem als nachhaltig empfundenen System gelingen kann. Begründet wird dies mit einer höheren Umwelteffizienz dieser Innovationen. Empirische Evidenz für diese Hypothese ist allerdings kaum zu finden. Dieses Papier prüft vor dem Hintergrund eines weltweit zunehmenden Einsatzes von Kohlekraftwerken und der dadurch zu erwarteten Umweltbelastungen die Hypothese, dass radikale Innovationen im Vergleich zu inkrementellen Innovationen überlegen sind. Anhand von Beispielen fossil befeuerter Kraftwerke wird untersucht, inwieweit sich radikale Innovationen im Kraftwerksbereich bisher durchsetzen konnten bzw. welche Hemmnisse ihnen grundsätzlich entgegenstanden. Hierzu werden u.a. die Druckkohlenstaubfeuerung als radikale Innovation und überkritische Kohlekraftwerke als inkrementelle Innovation miteinander verglichen. Anhand einer Ex-Post Analyse lässt sich für den Kraftwerksbereich zeigen, dass sich umweltfreundliche Techniken, die radikale Neuerungen darstellen, nur sehr schwer durchsetzen konnten. Die Zukunftspotenziale für radikale Innovationen auf dem Gebiet der Kraftwerkstechnik sind insbesondere aufgrund des relativ hohen Kostendrucks, der geringen Risikobereitschaft von Energieversorgungsunternehmen und der großen zeitlichen Dynamik des inkrementellen Fortschritts bei konventionellen Referenztechnologien als relativ gering anzusehen. Für zukünftige F&E-Arbeiten auf dem großtechnischen Kraftwerkssektor lässt sich folgern, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Erfolgs einer Neuentwicklung umso größer ist, je näher sie sich an den etablierten Techniklinien orientiert. Auch im Zuge der Energiemarktliberalisierung sind für diesen Technikbereich kaum radikale Neuerungen zu erwarten. --inkrementelle Innovationen,radikale Innovationen,evolutorische Ökonomie,Kraftswerkstechnik

How clean is clean? Incremental versus radical technological change in coal-fired power plants

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar. Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server: ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp09021.pdf I Das Wichtigste in Kürze In der Diskussion um Innovationen für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung werden häufig radikale II Non-technical summary In the discussion on innovations for sustainable development, radical innovations are often seen as necessary to establish eco-efficient technological systems. It is assumed that only a regime shift from the existing (unsustainable) technological system to a more sustainable one can solve the ecological problems. In this perspective radical innovations are needed for a successful transition to a system perceived as sustainable. The justification for radical change is the greater environmental efficiency of these innovations. This hypothesis is, however, not supported by empirical evidence. Against the background of a globally increasing use of coal-burning power plants and the environmental impacts to be expected, the hypothesis that radical innovations are superior to incremental innovations is reflected in this paper. We examine the diffusion of radical innovations in the field of power plants and the basic obstacles these innovations were confronted with. As an example for the ex-post-analysis we select the case of pressurised pulverised coal combustion as a radical innovation and supercritical coal-fired power plants as an incremental innovation. The analysis shows that pressurised pulverised coal combustion did not fulfil the expectations. Although an improved economic and ecological performance of the radical innovation was expected ex ante, unforeseen innovations were developed for the old technology (supercritical coal-fired power plants). Thus the radical innovation failed. It can be concluded that the dynamics of technical progress and the development of incremental innovations should not be underestimated. Assumed advantages for radical technologies should be verified, and the technology assessment should be regularly updated regarding cost and efficiency advantages. In general the future potential of radical innovations in the field of power plant technology is to be regarded as relatively low, especially due to comparatively high cost-pressure, the reluctance of energy supply companies to take risks and the dynamics of technological progress facilitating incremental innovations on the basis of conventional reference technology. The conclusion for future research and development (R&D) work in the sector of large-scale power plants is that an innovation is more likely to succeed the more it is geared to established technological trajectories. In the context of energy market liberalisation, hardly any radical innovations are expected in this field of technology. The findings of this paper may also be helpful in evaluating risks or probabilities of success of technologies being developed. As an example technological trajectories currently favoured in CO 2 capture are discussed. Abstract In the discussion on innovations for sustainable development, radical innovations are frequently called for in order that the transformation of society to a system perceived as sustainable can succeed. The reason given for this is the greater environmental efficiency of these innovations. This hypothesis is, however, not supported by empirical evidence. Against the background of a globally increasing use of coal-burning power plants and the environmental impacts to be expected, the hypothesis that radical innovations are superior to incremental innovations is reviewed on the basis of fossil fuel power plants. This paper examines the diffusion of incremental and radical innovations in the field of power plants and the basic obstacles with which these innovations were confronted. To give an example, Pressurised Pulverised Coal Combustion (PPCC) as a radical innovation and supercritical coal-fired power plants as an incremental innovation are compared. An ex-post analysis of the German R&D portfolio in the past three decades in the field of power plants environmentally shows that technologies which were radical innovations had great difficulties in becoming accepted by possible investors. The future potential of radical innovations in the field of power plant technology is to be regarded as relatively low, especially due to comparatively high cost-pressure, the reluctance of utilities to take risks and the temporal dynamics of technological progress facilitating incremental innovations on the basis of conventional reference technology. The conclusion for future R&D work in the sector of large-scale power plants is that an innovation is more likely to succeed the more it follows established technological trajectories. In the context of energy market liberalisation, hardly any radical innovations are expected in this field of technology. The findings of this paper may also be helpful in evaluating risks or probabilities of success of technologies being developed. As an example technological trajectories currently favoured in CO 2 capture are discussed

CO2 emission reduction in the cement industry by using a solar calciner

This paper discusses the techno-economic potential of solar thermal calciner technology in the cement industry. On the basis of a solar calciner test rig built at the German Aerospace Center (DLR), a solar cement plant is designed and the heliostat field is calculated. The energy balance in the solar calciner is analyzed and different scenarios are investigated. The achievable CO2 avoidance rate for solar cement plants for the considered scenarios lies between 14 and 17%. CO2 avoidance costs are 118 EUR/t in a conservative base case and can be as low as 74 EUR/t depending on the chosen direct normal irradiation (DNI), reactor efficiency and solar multiple. A strong impact of the reactor efficiency on the costs was shown. Increasing the reactor efficiency by 15% points reduces the avoidance costs by 26%. Additionally, the CO2 emission reduction potential is calculated for Spain through 2050. It was found that for solar calciners, replacing the fossil fuel in the conventional calciner, emission reductions in the Spanish cement industry range between 2 and 7% by 2050. Implementation of a controlled sequestration of the CO2 in the solar calciner shows a big impact and emission reductions from 8 to 28% can be achieved

Clinical correlates of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody profiles in Spanish COVID-19 patients from a high incidence region

Laboratory testing for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) consists of two pillars: the detection of viral RNA via rt-PCR as the diagnostic gold standard in acute cases, and the detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. However, concerning the latter, questions remain about their diagnostic and prognostic value and it is not clear whether all patients develop detectable antibodies. We examined sera from 347 Spanish COVID-19 patients, collected during the peak of the epidemic outbreak in Spain, for the presence of IgA and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and evaluated possible associations with age, sex and disease severity (as measured by duration of hospitalization, kind of respiratory support, treatment in ICU and death). The presence and to some degree the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies depended mainly on the amount of time between onset of symptoms and the collection of serum. A subgroup of patients did not develop antibodies at the time of sample collection. Compared to the patients that did, no differences were found. The presence and level of antibodies was not associated with age, sex, duration of hospitalization, treatment in the ICU or death. The case-fatality rate increased exponentially with older age. Neither the presence, nor the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies served as prognostic markers in our cohort. This is discussed as a possible consequence of the timing of the sample collection. Age is the most important risk factor for an adverse outcome in our cohort. Some patients appear not to develop antibodies within a reasonable time frame. It is unclear, however, why that is, as these patients differ in no respect examined by us from those who developed antibodies

Agricultural innovation platform dynamics: A conceptual framework to analyze knowledge production.

Innovation platforms (IPs) appear to be one of the most appropriate tools to operationalize research for development. Increasingly, agricultural research initiatives for development set up innovation platforms to facilitate the management and support of innovation processes. Yet, the mechanisms by which they operate are not well understood. This paper seeks to open the "black-box" and proposes a framework to analyze processes that occur in innovation platforms from inception to maturity. Firstly, we use a New Institutional Economics (NIE) based analytical framework for the M&E of IP performance. Secondly, from a review of the literature, we identify three ways through which research could be done within IPs: 1) soft transfer, when research has readily available results that could help solve jointly identified problems; 2) co-creation, when researchers and IP members develop research objectives and protocols together; and 3) community-based research, when IP members set up experiments on their own. We propose that both frameworks should be used to improve the monitoring of IP dynamics. (Résumé d'auteur