Tuesday, January 2, 2018

Cost of Energy Comparison, Including Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE)—2018 Update

There must be numerous ways to compare cost of technologies for generation, storage and delivery of energy. The most widely used measure for this purpose has been Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE). LCOE is also known as LEC (Levelized Energy Cost), LUEC (Levelized Unit Energy Cost), or busbar cost. LRMC (Long-Run Marginal Cost) is a similar but different measure, although it is often presented by LCOE due to LCOE’s characteristics being a proxy of LRMC.
I have been updating this list since April 2010. In this new list for 2018, I tried to include a variety of cost comparison metrics, while continuing to provide extensive references for LCOE.
However, let me admit that there are many critics of (or alternatives to) using LCOE as a means of comparing the economics of electricity generation technology options. The three most notable examples of them:
Hirth, L., Ueckerdt, F., & Edenhofer, O. (2015). Integration costs revisited – An economic framework for wind and solar variability. Renewable Energy, 74, 925–939. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.08.065];
Schmalensee, R. (2016). The Performance of U.S. Wind and Solar Generators. The Energy Journal, 37(1), 123–151. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.5547/01956574.37.1.rsch];
Woolf, T., Whited, M., Knight, P., Vitolo, T., & Takahashi, K. (2016). Show Me the Numbers: A Framework for Balanced Distributed Solar Policies. Cambridge, MA: Synapse Energy Economics. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Synapse-Framework].

I. Cost of Every Power Technology

Alberici, S. et al. (2014). Subsidies and Costs of EU energy. (DESNL14583). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Ecofys. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EU-LCOE] | Component cost breakdown for each country at http://j.mp/EU-LCOE-Component]

The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering. (2011). New Power Cost Comparisons: Levelised Cost of Electricity for a Range of New Power Generating Technologies. Melbourne, Australia: The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE) [Full-text at http://j.mp/l1Sk1j]

Australian Energy Market Operator. (2017). South Australian Fuel and Technology Report. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO). [Full-text at http://j.mp/AEMO_LCOE]

Bedilion, R. (2013). Program on Technology Innovation: Integrated Generation Technology Options 2012. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). [Full-text at http://j.mp/EPRI2012]

Black & Veatch. (2012). Cost and Performance Data for Power Generation Technologies: Prepared for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Overland Park, KS: Black & Veatch Corporation. [Full-text at http://j.mp/BV_LCOE]

Bloomberg New Energy Finance. (2017). 2017 Sustainable Energy in America Factbook. New York, NY: Bloomberg Finance; Washington, DC: The Business Council for Sustainable Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/BNEF_LCOE_2017]

Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (2013). Australian Energy Technology Assessment (AETA) 2013 Model Update. Canberra, Australia: Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). [Full-text at http://j.mp/AETA2013]

Channell, J., Jansen, H. R., Syme, A. R., Savvantidou, S., Morse, E. L., Yuen, A. (2013). Energy Darwinism: The Evolution of the Energy Industry. Citi GPS: Global Perspectives & Solutions. New York, NY: Citigroup. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Citi_LCOE]

Climatescope. (2015). Climatescope 2015: The Clean Energy Country Competitiveness Index. Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF), UK Department for International Development (DFID), Power Africa, & Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). [Full-text and data at http://j.mp/ClimateScope2015]

Cole, W., et al. (2017). 2017 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook. (NREL/TP-6A20-68548). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Website for the "Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) and Standard Scenarios" http://j.mp/ATB_NREL; Full-text at http://j.mp/ATB_2017; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/ATB_2017_XLS]

Committee on America’s Energy Future. (2009). Americas Energy Future: Technology and Transformation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [Full-text at http://bit.ly/8ZsYVM]

Committee on Climate Change. (2015). Power Sector Scenarios for the Fifth Carbon Budget. London, UK: Committee on Climate Change. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_LCOE; Data at http://j.mp/UK_LCOE_XLS]

Committee on Determinants of Market Adoption of Advanced Energy Efficiency and Clean Energy Technologies. (2016). The Power of Change: Innovation for Development and Deployment of Increasingly Clean Electric Power Technologies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [Full-text at http://j.mp/US_LCOE]

Danish Energy Agency. (2015). Levelized Cost of Energy Calculator. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCOE_Calculator; Spreadsheet at http://j.mp/LCOE_Calculator_XLSM]

Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). (2016). Electricity Generation Costs (November 2016). London, UK: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (Formerly: Department of Energy & Climate Change [DECC]). [Full-text at http://j.mp/BEIS_LCOE]

Dowling, P., & Gray, M. (2016). End of the Load for Coal and Gas?: Challenging Power Technology Assumptions. London, UK: Carbon Tracker. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CarbonTracker_LCOE]

E3M-Lab. (2016). EU Reference Scenario 2016: Energy, transport and GHG emissions Trends to 2050. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EU_Reference_LCOE]

Electric Power Research Institute. (2016). Australian Power Generation Technology Report. Melbourne, Australi: CO2CRC. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Australia_LCOE]

Electricity Generation Costs Verification Working Group (Japan). (2015). Electricity Generation Costs Verification Report for the Long-Term Energy Supply and Demand Outlook Subcommittee (長期エネルギー需給見通し小委員会に対する 発電コスト等の検証に関する報告). Tokyo, Japan: Agency for Natural Resources and Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Japan_LCOE_2015; Power plant specifications at http://j.mp/Japan_Specs_2015]

Energy and Environment Conference, & Electricity Generation Costs Verification Committee (Japan). (2011). Electricity Generation Costs Verification Report. Tokyo, Japan: National Policy Unit, Cabinet Secretariat. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Japan_LCOE; Summary chart at http://j.mp/Japan_LCOE_Summary; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/Japan_LCOE_XLS]

European Commission. (2008). Commission staff working document accompanying the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Second Strategic Energy Review : an EU energy security and solidarity action plan - Energy Sources, Production Costs and Performance of Technologies for Power Generation, Heating and Transport. SEC(2008) 2872. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/9BST2r]

Finkel, A. (2017). Independent Review into the Future Security of the National Electricity Market: Blueprint for the Future. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Finkel_Review]

Freese, B., Clemmer, S., Martinez, C., & Nogee, A. (2011). A Risky Proposition: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants. Cambridge, MA: Union of Concerned Scientists. [Full-text at: http://j.mp/Risky_Proposition; Appendix A (LCOE) at http://j.mp/UCS_LCOE]

Fürstenwerth, D. (2014). Calculator of Levelized Cost of Electricity for Power Generation Technologies. Berlin, Germany: Agora Energiewende. [Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/Agora_LCOE]

Google.org. (2011). The Impact of Clean Energy Innovation: Examining the Impact of Clean Energy Innovation on the United States Energy System and Economy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Google_CEI]

Greenstone, M., & Looney, A. (2011). A Strategy for America’s Energy Future: Illuminating Energy’s Full Costs. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. [Full-text at http://j.mp/mqEXUQ]

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014). Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Full-text at http://mitigation2014.org (Find in Chapter 7: Energy Systems.)]

International Energy Agency. (2014). The Power of Transformation: Wind, Sun and the Economics of Flexible Power Systems. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264208032-en]

International Energy Agency. (2015). Energy Technology Perspectives 2015: Mobilising Innovation to Accelerate Climate Action. Paris, IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/20792603 | Executive Summary | Tracking Clean Energy Progress 2015]

International Energy Agency. (2016). Energy Technology Perspectives 2016: Towards Sustainable Urban Energy Systems. Paris, IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/energy_tech-2016-en | Executive Summary | Tracking Clean Energy Progress 2016]

International Energy Agency. (2017). Energy Technology Perspectives 2017: Catalysing Energy Technology Transformations. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://doi.org/10.1787/energy_tech-2017-en | Executive Summary | Tracking Clean Energy Progress 2017]

International Energy Agency. (2017). World Energy Investment 2017. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Fulll-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264277854-en]

International Energy Agency (IEA), & International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2017). Perspectives for the Energy Transition: Investment Needs for a Low-Carbon Energy System. Berlin, Germany: Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi; Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy). [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEA_IRENA_2DS]

International Energy Agency, & Nuclear Energy Agency. (2010). Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - 2010 Edition. Paris, France: OECD Publications. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEA2010LCOE

International Energy Agency, & Nuclear Energy Agency. (2015). Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - 2015 Edition. Paris, France: OECD Publications. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/cost_electricity-2015-en; Corrigendum at http://j.mp/IEA2015LCOE_Corrigendum; Executive summary at http://j.mp/IEA2015LCOE_ES | Presentation slides at http://j.mp/IEA2015LCOE_PPT]

Irlam, L. (2015). The Costs of CCS and Other Low-Carbon Technologies in the United States: 2015 Update. Melbourne, Australia: Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CCS_Costs]

Joskow, P. L. (2011). Comparing the Costs of Intermittent and Dispatchable Electricity Generating Technologies. EUI Working Paper RSCAS (Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies), 2011/45. Fiesole, Italy: European University Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Joskow_EUI]

Kaplan, S. (2008). Power Plants: Characteristics and Costs. CRS Report for Congress, RL34746. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. [Full-text at http://bit.ly/d7M0Ja]

Küchler, S., & Meyer, B. (2012). 
The full costs of power generation: A comparison of subsidies and societal cost of renewable and conventional energy sources. Hamburg, Germany: Greenpeace Energy eG; Berlin, Germany: Bundesverband WindEnergie (BWE; German Wind Energy Association). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Full_Costs]

Lazard Ltd. (2017). Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis—Version 11.0. New York, NY: Lazard Ltd. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Lazard_LCOE_ver11]

Liebreich, M., Zindler, E., Tringas, T., Gurung, A., & von Bismarck, M. (2011). Green Investing 2011: Reducing the Cost of Financing. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. [Full-text at http://j.mp/BNEF-WEF-2011]

Logan, J. et al. (2017). Electricity Generation Baseline Report. (NREL/TP-6A20-67645). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EG_Baseline_LCOE]

Matsuo, Y., Yamaguchi, Y., & Murakami, T. (2013). Historical Trends in Japans Long-Term Power Generation Costs by Source: Assessed by Using Corporate Financial Statements. Tokyo, Japan: The Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ). [Full-text at http://j.mp/JP_Gen_Cost]

Mott MacDonald. (2011). Costs of low-carbon generation technologies. London, UK: Committee on Climate Change. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Mott-MacDonald]

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2013). Transparent Cost Database: Generation. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Data at http://en.openei.org/apps/TCDB/]

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2016). Levelized Cost of Energy Calculator. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Website at http://j.mp/LCOE_NREL]

Nitsch, J. et al. (2012). Langfristszenarien und Strategien für den Ausbau der Erneuerbaren Energien in Deutschland bei Berücksichtigung der Entwicklung in Europa und Global (Long-term scenarios and strategies for the deployment of renewable energies in Germany in view of European and global developments). Stuttgart, Berlin: Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. [Full-text at http://j.mp/German_LCOE; Technical annex at http://j.mp/German_LCOE_Annex; Data at http://j.mp/German_LCOE_XLS]

Parsons Brinckerhoff. (2013). Electricity Generation Cost Model - 2013 Update of Non-Renewable Technologies. London, UK: Department for Energy and Climate Change. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_NonRE_LCOE]

Paul Scherrer Institut. (2010). Sustainable Electricity: Wishful thinking or near-term reality? Energie-Spiegel: Facts for the Energy Decisions of Tomorrow20. Villigen, Switzerland: Paul Scherrer Institut. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Energie-Spiegel]

Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI). (2017). Potentials, Costs and Environmental Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies. Bern, Switzerland: Bundesamt für Energie (BFE; Swiss Federal Office of Energy [SFOE]). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Swiss_LCOE; Synthesis at http://j.mp/Swiss_LCOE_Synthesis]

Pourreza, S. et al. (2014). Evolving Economics of Power and Alternative Energy. New York, NY: Citi Research. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Citi_LCOE_2014]

Pöyry. (2013). Technology Supply Curves for Low-Carbon Power Generation: A Report to the Committee on Climate Change. Oxford, UK: Pöyry Management Consulting. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LowCarbonLCOE]

Ram, M., Child, M., Aghahosseini, A., Bogdanov, D., & Poleva, A. (2017). Comparing Electricity Production Costs of Renewables to Fossil and Nuclear Power Plants in G20 Countries. Hamburg, Germany: Greenpeace. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Greenpeace_LCOE]

Rhyne, I., Klein, J., & Neff, B. (2015). Estimated Cost of New Renewable and Fossil Generation in California. (CEC-200-2014-003-SF). Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CEC_LCOE]

Rhodes, J. D. et al. (2016). New U.S. Power Costs: by County, with Environmental Externalities—A Geographically Resolved Method to Estimate Levelized Power Plant Costs with Environmental Externalities. "The Full Cost of Electricity (FCe-)" initiative. Austin, TX: Energy Institute, The University of Texas at Austin. [Full-text at: http://j.mp/US_Power_LCOE; Calculator at http://j.mp/US_Power_LCOE_Calc]

Schröder, A., Kunz, F., Meiss, J., Mendelevitch, R., & von Hirschhausen, C. (2013). Current and prospective costs of electricity generation until 2050. (Data Documentation, No. 68). Berlin, Germany: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin; the German Institute for Economic Research). [Full-text at http://j.mp/DIW_LCOE]

Siemens Wind Power. (2014). SCOE – Society’s costs of electricity: How society should find its optimal energy mix. Erlangen, Germany: Siemens AG. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Siemens_SCOE]

Skone, T. J., Littlefield, J., Cooney, G., & Marriott, J. (2013). Power Generation Technology Comparison from a Life Cycle Perspective. (DOE/NETL-2012/1567). National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_LCOE]

Stacy, T. F., & Taylor, G. S. (2016). The Levelized Cost of Electricity from Existing Generation Resources. Washington, DC: Institute for Energy Research. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IER_LCOE]

U.S. Department of Energy. (2015). Quadrennial Technology Review: An Assessment of Energy Technologies and Research Opportunities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/QTR_2015]

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2017). Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2017. Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. [Full-text at http://j.mp/AEO2017_LCOE]

Veiga, M. M., Álvarez, P. F., Moraleda, M. F.-M., & Kleinsorge, A. (2013). Study on Cost and Business Comparison of Renewable vs. Non-renewable Technologies (RE-COST). Utrecht, The Netherlands: IEA - Renewable Energy Technology Deployment (RETD). [Full-text at http://j.mp/RE-COST]

VGB PowerTech. (2015). Levelised Cost of Electricity 2015. Essen, Germany: VGB PowerTech Service. [Full-text at http://j.mp/VGB_LCOE]

World Energy Council, & Bloomberg New Energy Finance. (2013). World Energy Perspective: Cost of Energy Technologies. London, UK: World Energy Council. [Full-text at http://j.mp/WEC_LCOE]

II. Cost of Renewable Power

II-1. Renewable Power Cost Comparison

Artelys, Armines, & Energies Demain. (2016). A 100% Renewable Electricity Mix? Analysis and Optimisation: Exploring the Boundaries of Renewable Power generation in France by 2050. Paris, France: Agence de l’environnement et de la maîtrise de l’énergie (ADEME; French Environment and Energy Management Agency). [Full-text at http://j.mp/France_LCOE]

Black & Veatch Corporation. (2010). Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative Phase 2B: Final Report. Sacramento, CA: RETI Stakeholder Steering Committee. [Full-text at http://j.mp/8ZbLPl]

De Jager, D. et al. (2011). Financing Renewable Energy in the European Energy Market. (PECPNL084659). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EU_RE_LCOE]

E3: Energy + Environmental Economics. (2015). CPUC RPS Calculator. San Francisco, CA: California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). [XLSM spreadsheet at http://j.mp/CPUC_RPS_LCOE]

Frankfurt School-UNEP Centre, & BNEF. (2017). Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2017. Frankfurt, Germany: Frankfurt School of Finance & Management. [Full-text at http://j.mp/RE_Investment_2017]

Hearps, P., & McConnell, D. (2011). Renewable Energy Technology Cost Review. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne Energy Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/iYoa6E]

IEA-ETSAP, & IRENA. (2013). Technology Briefs (of 10 Renewable Energy Technologies). Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: International Renewable Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/ETSAP_IRENA]

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2012). IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SRREN]

International Energy Agency. (2017). Renewables 2017: Analysis and Forecasts to 2022. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/re_mar-2017-en]
International Renewable Energy Agency. (2014). REmap 2030: A Renewable Energy Roadmap, June 2014. Abu Dhabi, UAE: IRENA Secretariat. [Full-text at http://j.mp/REmap2030]

International Renewable Energy Agency. (2012). Renewable Energy Technologies: Cost Analysis Series - Volume 1: Power Sector. Abu Dhabi, UAE: IRENA Secretariat. [Full-text: http://j.mp/IRENA_Windhttp://j.mp/IRENA_PVhttp://j.mp/IRENA_Hydrohttp://j.mp/IRENA_CSPhttp://j.mp/IRENA_Biomass]

International Renewable Energy Agency. (2016). The Power to Change: Solar and Wind Cost Reduction Potential to 2025. Abu Dhabi, UAE: IRENA Secretariat. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Solar_Wind]

IRENA. (2018). Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: International Renewable Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Renewables_LCOE_2017]

Jacobson, M. Z. et al. (2015). 100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States. Energy & Environmental Science. doi: 10.1039/C5EE01283J [Full-text and data at http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/WWS-50-USState-plans.html]

Jacobson, M. Z. et al. (2017). 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World (August 10, 2017). Corte Madera, CA: The Solutions Project. [Full-text at http://j.mp/WWS_LCOE; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/WWS_LCOE_XLS]

Kost, C. et al. (2013). Levelized Cost of Electricity – Renewable Energy Technologies. Freiburg, Germany: Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Fraunhofer_LCOE]

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd. (2011). Review of the generation costs and deployment potential of renewable electricity technologies in the UK. London, UK: Department of Energy and Climate Change. [Full-text ahttp://j.mp/UK_Renewable_LCOE]

Ram, M. et al. (2017). Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy—Power Sector. Lappeenranta, Finland: Lappeenranta University of Technology; Berlin, Germany: Energy Watch Group. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LUT_EWG_LCOE]

REN21. (2017). Renewables 2017 Global Status Report. Paris, France: REN21 Secretariat. [Full-text at http://j.mp/RE2017GSR]

Sustainable Energy Advantage, LLC. (2011). Cost of Renewable Energy Spreadsheet Tool (CREST). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Excel files at http://j.mp/CREST_LCOE]

Syed, A. et al. (2014). Asia Pacific Renewable Energy Assessment. Canberra, Australia: Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Asia-Pacific_RE_LCOE]

Tesniere, L. et al. (2017). Mapping the cost of capital for wind and solar energy in South Eastern European Member States. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Ecofys. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SE_EU_LCOE]

II-2. Biomass Power

LCICG. (2012). Technology Innovation Needs Assessment (TINA): Bioenergy - Summary Report. Low Carbon Innovation Co-ordination Group (LCICG). [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCICG_Bioenergy]

II-3. Geothermal Power

Limberger, J. et al. (2014). Assessing the prospective resource base for enhanced geothermal systems in Europe. Geothermal Energy Science2. 55-71. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/gtes-2-55-2014]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Geothermal Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2011/1531). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_Geothermal]

II-4. Hydro Power

European Small Hydropower Association. (2012). Small Hydropower Roadmap: Condensed research data for EU-27. Brussels, Belgium: European Small Hydropower Association. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Small_Hydro_LCOE; Data at http://streammap.esha.be/19.0.html]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Hydropower Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2011/1519). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_Hydro]

II-5. Marine (Wave, Tide) Energy Power

Badcock-Broe, A. et al. (2014). Wave and Tidal Energy Market Deployment Strategy for Europe. Brussels, Belgium: Strategic Initiative for Ocean Energy (SI OCEAN). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Wave_Tide_LCOE]

Carbon Trust, University of Edinburgh, & JRC. (2013). Ocean Energy: Cost of Energy and Cost Reduction Opportunities. Brüssels, Belgium: Strategic Initiative for Ocean Energy (SI OCEAN). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Ocean_LCOE]

Commission Staff. (2014). Impact Assessment: Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Ocean Energy: Action needed to deliver on the potential of ocean energy by 2020 and beyond. (SWD(2014) 13 final). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/OceanE_LCOE]

LCICG. (2012). Technology Innovation Needs Assessment (TINA): Marine Energy - Summary Report. Low Carbon Innovation Co-ordination Group (LCICG). [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCICG_Marine]

Magagna, D., & Uihlein, A. (2015). 2014 JRC Ocean Energy Status Report: Technology, market and economic aspects of ocean energy in Europe. Petten, The Netherlands: Joint Research Centre, European Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EU_Ocean_LCOE]

Neary, V. S. et al. (2014). Methodology for Design and Economic Analysis of Marine Energy Conversion (MEC) Technologies. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Marine_LCOE]

II-6. Solar Photovoltaic (and Thermal) Power

Australian Energy Council. (2017). Solar Report: March 2017. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Energy Council. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Australia_PV_LCOE]

Baker, E., Fowlie, M., Lemoine, D., & Reynolds, S. S. (2013). The Economics of Solar Electricity. Annual Review of Resource Economics5, 387-426. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-091912-151843]

Barbose, G. L., & Darghouth, N. R. (2016). Tracking the Sun IX: The Installed Price of Residential and Non-Residential Photovoltaic Systems in the United States. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/US_PV_LCOE_2016; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/US_PV_2016_XLS]

Bolinger, M., Seel, J., & LaCommare, K. H. (2017). Utility-Scale Solar 2016: An Empirical Analysis of Project Cost, Performance, and Pricing Trends in the United States. (LBNL-2001055). Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/US_Solar_LCOE_2017; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/US_Solar_LCOE_2017_XLSX]

Breyer, C., & Gerlach, A. (2013). Global overview on grid-parity. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications21(1), 121-136. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pip.1254]

Briano, J. I., Báez, M. J., & Morales, R. M. (2016). PV Grid Parity Monitor (Commercial, Residential, and Utility Sectors). Madrid, Spain: Creara. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_GridParity]

Bronski, P., Creyts, J., Crowdis, M., Doig, S., Glassmire, J., Guccione, L, Lilienthal, P., Mandel, J., Rader, B., Seif, D., Tocco, H., & Touati, H. (2015). The Economics of Load Defection: How Grid-Connected Solar-Plus-Battery Systems Will Compete with Traditional Electric Service, Why It Matters, and Possible Paths Forward. Boulder, CO: Rocky Mountain Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Solar_Battery_Cost]

Darling, S. B., You, F., Veselka, T., & Velosa, A. (2011). Assumptions and the levelized cost of energy for photovoltaics. Energy & Environmental Science4, 3133-3139. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c0ee00698j]

Denholm, P., O’Connell, M., Brinkman, G., & Jorgenson, J. (2015). Overgeneration from Solar Energy in California: A Field Guide to the Duck Chart. (NREL/TP-6A20-65023). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CA_PV_LCOE]

Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE. (2015). Current and Future Cost of Photovoltaics. Long-term Scenarios for Market Development, System Prices and LCOE of Utility-Scale PV Systems. Berlin, Germany: Agora Energiewende. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_LCOE]

IEA PVPS. (2016). Trends 2016 in Photovoltaic Applications: Survey Report of Selected IEA Countries between 1992 and 2015. (IEA PVPS T1-30:2016). St. Ursen, Switzerland: IEA Photovoltaic Power System Programme. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PVPS2016]

IRENA. (2017). IRENA Cost and Competitiveness Indicators: Rooftop Solar PV. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). [Full-text at http://j.mp/Rooftop_PV]

Jones-Albertus, R., Feldman, D., Fu, R., Horowitz, K., & Woodhouse, M. (2015). Technology Advances Needed for Photovoltaics to Achieve Widespread Grid Price Parity. Washington, DC: Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_Grid_Parity]

KPMG. (2015). UK Solar beyond Subsidy: The Transition. London, UK: Renewable Energy Association. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_PV_LCOE]

Mendelsohn, M., Kreycik, C., Bird, L., Schwabe, P., & Cory, K. (2012). The Impact of Financial Structure on the Cost of Solar Energy. (NREL/TP-6A20-53086). [Full-text at http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53086.pdf]

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (2012). SunShot Vision Study. (DOE/GO-102012-3037). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/47927.pdf]

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE). (2016). The SunShot Initiative’s 2030 Goal: 3¢ per Kilowatt Hour for Solar Electricity. (DOE/EE-1501). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SunShot2030LCOE; Presentation slides at http://j.mp/SunShot2030LCOE_PPTX]

Philipps, S. P., Kost, C., & Schlegl, T. (2014). Up-to-Date Levelised Cost of Electricity of Photovoltaics: Background from Fraunhofer ISE Relating to IPCC WGIII 5th Assessment Report, Final Draft, September 2014. Freiburg, Germany: Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE (Institut für Solare Energiesysteme). [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCOE_PV]

Reichelstein, S., & Yorston, M. (2012). Solar-LCOE Calculator. [Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/Reichelstein_LCOE; Developed for the following paper: Reichelstein, S., & Yorston, M. (2013). The prospects for cost competitive solar PV power. Energy Policy55, 117-127. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.11.003]

Rutovitz, J. et al. (2014). Breaking the solar gridlock: Potential benefits of installing concentrating solar thermal power at constrained locations in the NEM. Sydney, Australia: Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS (University of Technology, Sydney). [Full-text at http://j.mp/CSP_LCOE_AU]

Schmalensee, R. et al. (2015). The Future of Solar Energy: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. [Full-text at http://j.mp/MIT_Solar_LCOE]

Shah, V., & Booream-Phelps, J. (2015). Crossing the Chasm: Solar Grid Parity in a Low Oil Price Era. New York, NY: Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Solar_Grid_Parity]

SunPower Corporation. (2011). Grid-Competitive Residential and Commercial Fully Automated PV Systems Technology. (DE-FC136-07GO17043). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SunPower_LCOE]

Tsuchida, B. et al. (2015). Comparative Generation Costs of Utility-Scale and Residential-Scale PV in Xcel Energy Colorado’s Service Area. Cambridge, MA: The Brattle Group. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_PV_LCOE]

Vartiainen, E., Masson, G., & Breyer, C. (2015). PV LCOE in Europe 2014–30. München, Germany: Secretariat of the European Photovoltaic Technology Platform. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_LCOE_EU]

Vartiainen, E., Masson, G., & Breyer, C. (2017). The True Competitiveness of Solar PV: A European Case Study. München, Germany: Secretariat of the European Technology and Innovation Platform for Photovoltaics. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EU_PV_LCOE]

Wirth, H. (2018). Recent Facts about Photovoltaics in Germany. Freiburg, Germany: Fraunhofer ISE. [Full-text at http://j.mp/GermanPV_LCOE]

Woodhouse, M., et al. (2016). On the Path to SunShot: The Role of Advancements in Solar Photovoltaic Efficiency, Reliability, and Costs. (NREL/TP-6A20-65872). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PV_Cost]

II-7. Solar Thermal Power/Heating/Cooling

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Solar Thermal Technology Assessment. (NETL/DOE-2012/1532). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_Solar]

Stadelmann, M., Frisari, G., Boyd, R., & Feás, J. (2014). The Role of Public Finance in CSP: Background and Approach to Measure its Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Climate Policy Initiative. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CSP_LCOE]

Weiss, W., Spörk-Dür, M., & Mauthner, F. (2017). Solar Heat Worldwide 2017: Global Market Development and Trends in 2016—Detailed Market Figures 2015. Cedar, MI: IEA Solar Heating & Cooling Programme. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SHC_LCOE]

II-8. Wind Power

Lacal Arántegui, R., & Serrano González, J. (2015). 2014 JRC Wind Status Report: Technology, Market and Economic Aspects of Wind Energy in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Wind_LCOE]

LCICG. (2012). Technology Innovation Needs Assessment (TINA): Offshore Wind Power - Summary Report. Low Carbon Innovation Co-ordination Group (LCICG). [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCICG_Wind]

Moné, C., Hand, M., Bolinger, M., Rand, J., Heimiller, D., & Ho, J. (2017). 2015 Cost of Wind Energy Review. (NREL/TP-6A20-66861). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Wind_LCOE_2015]

Musial, W., Beiter, P., Schwabe, P., Tian, T., Stehly, T., & Spitsen, P. (2017). 2016 Offshore Wind Technologies Market Report. (DE-AC36-08GO28308). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/2016_Offshore_Wind]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Wind Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2012/1536). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_Wind]

Offshore Renewable Energy (ORE) Catapult. (2015). Cost Reduction Monitoring Framework: Summary Report to the Offshore Wind Programme Board. London, UK: Offshore Wind Programme Board, the Crown Estate. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_Offshore_LCOE; Qualitative summary (by DNV GL) at http://j.mp/UK_Offshore_Qualitative; Quantitative summary (by Deloitte) at

Orrell, A. C., Foster, N. F., Morris, S. L., & Homer, J. S. (2017). 2016 Distributed Wind Market Report. (DE-AC05-76RL01830). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/2016_Distributed_Wind; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/2016_Distributed_Wind_XLS]

Tegen, S., Lantz, E.,Hand, M., Maples, B.,Smith, A., & Schwabe, P. (2013). 2011 Cost of Wind Energy Review. (NREL/TP-5000-56266). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56266.pdf]

Vitina, A. et al. (2015). IEA Wind Task 26: Wind Technology, Cost, and Performance Trends in Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway, the European Union, and the United States: 2007–2012. (NREL/TP-6A20-64332). Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEA_Wind_LCOE]

Willow, C., & Valpy, B. (2015). Approaches to Cost-Reduction in Offshore Wind: A Report for the Committee on Climate Change. Swindon, UK: BVG Associates. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Offshore_Wind_LCOE]

Wiser, R., & Bolinger, M. (2017). 2016 Wind Technologies Market Report. (DOE/GO-102917-5033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/USA_Wind_2016; Excel spreadsheet at http://j.mp/USA_Wind_2016_XLS]

Wiser, R. et al. (2015). Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States. (DOE/GO-102015-4557). Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Wind_Vision | Scenario Viewer]

Wiser, R. et al. (2016). Forecasting Wind Energy Costs and Cost Drivers: The Views of the World’s Leading Experts. (LBNL- 1005717). Berkeley, CA: Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Wind_Cost]

III. Cost of Fossil Energy Power

III-1. Fossil Power Cost Comparison

Finkenrath, M. (2011). Cost and Performance of Carbon Dioxide Capture from Power Generation. IEA Energy PapersN° 2011/05. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kgggn8wk05l-en]

Fout, T. et al. (2015). Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants. Volume 1a: Bituminous Coal (PC) and Natural Gas to Electricity - Revision 3.
Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PC_NGCC_COE]

International Energy Agency. (2013). Technology Roadmap: Carbon Capture and Storage. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEA_CCS_LCOE]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2010). Life Cycle Analysis: Power Studies Compilation Report (DOE/NETL-2010/1419). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/laPsP6]

Pöyry Management Consulting, & Element Energy. (2015). Potential CCS Cost Reduction Mechanisms. London, UK: Committee on Climate Change. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CCS_LCOE_UK]

UK Carbon Capture and Storage Cost Reduction Task Force. (2013). CCS Cost Reduction Taskforce: Final Report. London, UK: Department of Energy & Climate Change. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_CCS_LCOE]

WorleyParsons, & Schlumberger. (2011). Economic Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies: 2011 Update. Canberra, Australia: The Global CCS Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CCS_LCOE]

III-2. Coal Power

Epstein, P. R., Buonocore, J. J., Eckerle, K., Hendryx, M., Stout III, B. M., Heinberg, R., Clapp, R. W., May, B., Reinhart, N. L., Ahern, M. M., Doshi, S. K., & Glustrom, L. (2011). Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences1219, 73-98. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05890.x]

IEAGHG. (2014). CO2 Capture at Coal Based Power and Hydrogen Plants. Cheltenham, UK: IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEAGHG). [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEAGHG_LCOE]

Lako, P. (2010). Coal-Fired Power. Technology Brief, E01. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/ETSAP_Coal_LCOE]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Pulverized Coal and Biomass Co-firing Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2012/1537). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Cofiring]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Updated Costs (June 2011 Basis) for Selected Bituminous Baseline Cases (NETL/DOE-341/082312). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Bituminous]

III-3. Natural Gas Power

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Natural Gas Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2012/1539). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NG_Power]

Seebregts, A. J. (2010). Gas-Fired Power. Technology Brief, E02. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/ETSAP_Gas_LCOE

IV. Cost of Nuclear Power

Congressional Budget Office. (2008). Nuclear Power’s Role in Generating Electricity. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CBO_Atom]

Cour des comptes. (2012). The Costs of the Nuclear Power Sector: Thematic Public Report. Paris, France: Cour des comptes (Court of Audit). [Full-text at http://j.mp/FR_Atom_Costs]

De Roo, G., & Parsons, J. E. (2011). A methodology for calculating the levelized cost of electricity in nuclear power systems with fuel recycling. Energy Economics33(5), 826-839. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2011.01.008. [Full-text at http://web.mit.edu/ceepr/www/publications/reprints/Reprint_233_WC.pdf]

Deutch, J. M., Forsberg, C. W., Kadak, A. C., Kazimi, M. S., Moniz, E. J., Parsons, J. E., Yangbo, D., & Pierpoint, L. (2009).Update of the MIT 2003 Future of Nuclear Power Study. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. [Full-text at http://j.mp/MIT_Atom_LCOE] 

DGA Consulting, & Carisway. (2016). Quantitative Viability Analysis of Electricity Generation from Nuclear Fuels. Adelaide, Australia: Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Australia_Atom_LCOE]

D’haeseleer, W. D. (2013). Synthesis on the Economics of Nuclear Energy. (ENER/2012/NUCL/SI2.643067). Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Energy (DG Enery), European Commission. [Full-text at 

Energy Options Network. (2017). What Will Advanced Nuclear Power Plants Cost? A Standardized Cost Analysis of Advanced Nuclear Technologies in Commercial Development. Washington, DC: Energy Innovation Reform Project. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Nuclear_LCOE]

Harris, G., Heptonstall, P., Gross, R., & Handley, D. (2012). Cost Estimates for Nuclear Power in the UK. (ICEPT/WP/2012/014). London, UK: Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology (ICEPT). [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_Atom_LCOE]

Hogue, M. T. (2012). A Review of the Costs of Nuclear Power Generation. Salt Lake City, UT: Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Utah. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Atom_LCOE_Utah]

International Atomic Energy Agency. (2014). Climate Change and Nuclear Power 2014. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. [Full-text at 

LCICG. (2013). Technology Innovation Needs Assessment (TINA): Nuclear Fission - Summary Report. Low Carbon Innovation Co-ordination Group (LCICG). [Full-text at 

Lecomte, M., Mario, N., & Vignon, D. (2014). A Worldwide Review of the Cost of Nuclear Power. Courbevoie, France: NucAdvisor. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NucAdvisor_LCOE]

National Audit Office. (2016). Nuclear Power in the UK. London, UK: National Audit Office. [Full-text at http://j.mp/2016_UK_LCOE]

National Audit Office. (2017). Hinkley Point C. London, UK: National Audit Office. [Full-text at http://j.mp/UK_Nuclear_Cost]

National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2012). Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Nuclear Technology Assessment (NETL/DOE-2011/1502). Pittsburgh, PA: National Energy Technology Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NETL_Atom]

Nuclear Energy Agency. (2011). Current Status, Technical Feasibility and Economics of Small Nuclear Reactors. Paris, France: OECD/NEA Publishing. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SMR_LUEC]

Nuclear Energy Agency. (2012). The Economics of Long-term Operation of Nuclear Power Plants. Paris, France: OECD/NEA Publishing. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NEA_LCOE]

Nuclear Energy Agency. (2015). Nuclear New Build: Insights into Financing and Project Management. Paris, France: OECD/NEA Publishing. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Atom_New_LCOE]

Nuclear Energy Institute. (2016). Status and Outlook for Nuclear Energy in the United States. Washington, DC: Nuclear Energy Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/NEI_LCOE]

Rosner, R., Klavans, J., & Olofin, S. (2015). Nuclear Fuel Cycle Cost Calculator. Chicago, IL: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. [Full-text and data at http://j.mp/Atom_LCOE]

Severance, C. A. (2009). Business Risks and Costs of New Nuclear Power. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. [Full-text at http://j.mp/CAP_Atom_LCOE]

Simbolotti, G. (2010). Nuclear Power. Technology Brief, E03. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. [Full-text at 

Szilard, R. et al. (2017). Economic and Market Challenges Facing the U.S. Nuclear Commercial Fleet—Cost and Revenue Study. (DE-AC07-05ID14517). Idaho Falls, ID: Idaho National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/INL_Nuclear_LCOE]

Task Force on the Future of Nuclear Power. (2016). Secretary of Energy Advisory Board—Report of the Task Force on the Future of Nuclear Power. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SEAB_Nuclear_TF]

Thomas, S. (2013). The Economics of Nuclear Power. Wien, Austria: Evaluation einer Hypothetischen "NUklearen Renaissance" (EHNUR). [Full-text at 

World Nuclear Association. (2017). Nuclear Power Economics and Project Structuring - 2017 Edition. London, UK: World Nuclear Association. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Nuclear_Economics]

WSP and Parsons Brinckerhoff. (2016). Quantitative Analysis and Initial Business Case - Establishing a Nuclear Power Plant and Systems in South Australia.  Adelaide, Australia: Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. [Full-text at http://j.mp/SA_Atom_LCOE]

V. Cost of Hydrogen-Carried Energy

Hinkley, J. et al. (2016). Cost Assessment of Hydrogen Production from PV and Electrolysis.  Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). [Full-text at http://j.mp/H2_PV]

International Energy Agency. (2015). Technology Roadmap: Hydrogen and Fuel Cells. Paris, France: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://j.mp/H2_LCOE]

VI. Cost of Energy Storage

AECOM Australia. (2015). Energy  Storage  Study: A Storage  Market Review and Recommendations  for Funding and Knowledge Sharing Priorities. Canberra, Australia: Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA). [Full-text at http://j.mp/ESS_LCOE]

Akhil, A. A. et al. (2015). DOE/EPRI Electricity Storage Handbook in Collaboration with NRECA. (SAND2015-1002). Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. [Full-text at http://j.mp/ES_LCOE_2015]

Brinsmead, T. S., Graham, P., Hayward, J., Ratnam, E. L., & Reedman, L. (2015). Future Energy Storage Trends: An Assessment of the Economic Viability, Potential Uptake and Impacts of Electrical Energy Storage on the NEM 2015–2035. (EP155039). Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). [Full-text at http://j.mp/ESS_LCOE_CSIRO]

Carnegie, R., Gotham, D., Nderitu, D., & Preckel, P. V. (2013). Utility Scale Energy Storage Systems: Benefits, Applications, and Technologies. West Lafayette, IN: State Utility Forecasting Group. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Utility_ESS]

Gardner, P., Jones, F., Rowe, M., Nouri, A., & van de Vegte, H. (2016). E-Storage: Shifting from Cost to Value, Wind and Solar Applications. London, UK: World Energy Council. [Full-text at http://j.mp/WEC_LCOS]

International Energy Agency. (2014). Technology Roadmap: Energy Storage. Paris, Frace: IEA Publications. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IEA_ES_LCOE; Technology annex at http://j.mp/IEA_ES_Annex]

International Renewable Energy Agency. (2012). Electricity Storage and Renewables for Island Power: A Guide for Decision Makers. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: International Renewable Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/ESS_IRENA]

International Renewable Energy Agency. (2015). Battery Storage for Renewables: Market Status and Technology Outlook. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: International Renewable Energy Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/IRENA_Battery]

Joint Research Centre. (2011). 2011 Technology Map of the European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan): Technology Descriptions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. [Full-text at http://j.mp/JRC_ESS]

Lazard Ltd. (2017). Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Storage Analysis—Version 3.0. New York, NY: Lazard Ltd. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Lazard_LCOS_ver3]

Nykvist, B. & Nilsson, M. (2015). Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nature Climate Change, 5, 329–332. [Full-text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2564; Data at http://j.mp/BEV_LCOE]

Rastler, D. (2010). Electricity Energy Storage Technology Options: A White Paper Primer on Applications, Costs, and Benefits. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute. [Full-text at http://j.mp/EPRI_ESS]

VII. Cost (LCOE or LCCE [Levelized Cost of Conserved Energy]) of Energy Efficiency or Demand Response Programs

Alstone, P. et al. (2016). 2015 California Demand Response Potential Study: Charting California’s Demand Response Future – Interim Report on Phase 1 Results. Berkeley, CA: Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LC_DR_California]

Billingsley, M. A. et al. (2014). The Program Administrator Cost of Saved Energy for Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs. (DE-AC02-05CH11231). Berkeley, CA: Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LBNL_LCSE]

Hoffman, I. M., et al. (2015). The Total Cost of Saving Electricity through Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs: Estimates at the National, State, Sector and Program Level. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Saved_Electricity]

Hoffman, I. M., Leventis, G., & Goldman, C. A. (2017). Trends in the Program Administrator Cost of Saving Electricity for Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs. (LBNL-1007009). Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Full-text at http://j.mp/PA_CSE]

Hornby, R. et al. (2015). Avoided Energy Supply Costs in New England: 2015 Report. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Advisory Council (EEAC). [Full-text at http://j.mp/New_England_Avoided_Cost]

Molina, M. (2014). The Best Value for America’s Energy Dollar: A National Review of the Cost of Utility Energy Efficiency Programs. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). [Full-text at http://j.mp/ACEEE_LCOE]

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Demand-Side Energy Efficiency Technical Support Document. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. [Full-text at http://j.mp/LCSE_EE]

Monday, August 28, 2017

Per Capita Residential and Industrial Electricity Consumption in G20 Countries, 2000–2015

It is a maintenance update of my previous post.
I've updated the post's two figures with latest data.

Figure 1: Per Capita Residential Electricity Consumption of G20 Countries, 2000–2015

Figure 2: Per Capita Industrial Electricity Consumption of G20 Countries, 2000–2015

Data sources:

(1) Electricity consumption:
International Energy Agency. (2003). Energy Statistics of Non-OECD Countries 2003. Paris, France: IEA Publications.
International Energy Agency. (2008). Energy Statistics of Non-OECD Countries 2008. Paris, France: IEA Publications.
International Energy Agency. (2013). Energy Statistics of Non-OECD Countries 2013. Paris, France: IEA Publications.
International Energy Agency. (2017). Electricity Information 2017. Paris, France: IEA Publications.
International Energy Agency. (2017). World Energy Statistics 2017. Paris, France: IEA Publications.
(2) Population:
World Bank. (2017). World Development Indicators—July 1, 2017. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

Due to Accelerating Greenhouse Effect, Oceans Are Recently Losing More Oxygen, with Deeper Water Masses Leaking Even Further

We know global oceans are absorbing 93 % of increased Earth’s heat content due to greenhouse effect, which are caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). Are those oceans just very generous bottomless sinks of global heat with no side effects? Of course, “NO”. They have been leaking oxygen into the atmosphere, possibly due to the rising water temperature.

The finding comes from a recent paper published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. Historic observations of dissolved oxygen (DO) in the global oceans from 1958 to 2015 quantitatively prove a significantly negative correlation between the DO and ocean heat content (OHC). Yes, our oceans are losing oxygen.

Sounds familiar? But, this study goes further. It shows that deeper water is losing more oxygen than the water at shallower depths. The reason? Deeper ocean is storing more heat. I regret that I cannot show the disturbing graphs here. Check out the paper by clicking the link below.

Reference: Ito, T., Minobe, S., Long, M. C., & Deutsch, C. (2017). Upper Ocean O2 Trends: 1958–2015. Geophysical Research Letters, (In Press), n/a–n/a. [Full-text at https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073613]

Figure: Global map of the linear trend of dissolved oxygen at the depth of 100 meters. (Credit: Georgia Tech)

Friday, April 21, 2017

“Protecting 50 % of Earth’s Surface Area”: the CBD’s Equivalent Goal to the UNFCCC’s Target of “Limiting Surface Temperature Rise to 2 Degrees”

Source: Dinerstein et al., 2017

I thought Edward O. Wilson was the first person who called for protecting half of the global terrestrial area in order to avoid catastrophic mass extinctions. Now, however, I learned the “Half-Earth” (Wilson, 2016) or “Nature Needs Half” (Locke, 2013) slogans have a decades-long robust scientific consensus among conservation biologists, dating back to Odum brothers’ 1972 paper. This month, a group of scientists published a comprehensive review paper (Dinerstein et al., 2017) in BioScience along with online thematic maps of 864 ecoregions distributed among the Earth’s 14 terrestrial biomes at http://ecoregions2017.appspot.com/.

For this paper, the authors have updated the famous 2001 ecoregions map. Then they assessed the extent of both protected areas and remaining natural habitat withing each (forested and nonforested) ecoregion. Previously, about 15 % of global land was known to be protected. According to this new analysis, only 12 % of the terrestrial biosphere (13 % of forested biomes and 10 % of nonforested biomes) is protected. So the authors suggest that the global efforts increase the amount of land under formal protection by 8 to 10 % per decade, while the current increase rate is 4 % per decade.

So, I think the Convention on Biological Diversity can set the “Half-Earth” as a tentative global goal that is its equivalent target to the UNFCCC’s goal of limiting global warming under 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial global average surface temperature. Of course, when the IPBES’s global assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services is published in 2019 (2nd quarter), the official global target endorsed by policymakers might become stricter, just as the Paris Agreement called for limiting the temperature increase to “below 1.5 degrees Celsius” above pre-industrial levels, even further than IPCC’s previous recommendation of 2 degrees-warming.


Dinerstein, E., et al. (2017). An Ecoregion-Based Approach to Protecting Half the Terrestrial Realm. BioScience, (In Press), bix014. [Full-text at http://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix014]

Locke, H. (2013). Nature Needs Half: A Necessary and Hopeful New Agenda for Protected Areas. Parks, 19(2), 9–18. [Full-text at http://j.mp/Locke2013]

Odum, E. D., & Odum, H. T. (1972). Natural Areas as Necessary Components of Man’s Total Environment. In Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference (pp. 178–189). Washington, DC: Wildlife Management Institute.

Wilson, E. O. (2016). Half-Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for Life. New York, NY: Liveright.

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Analytical Conceptual Frameworks of IPBES: An Update

This is a minor update of my previous (June 2014) post (“Analytical Conceptual Frameworks of IPBES”) at http://j.mp/IPBES. There was a small change from the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

The “Nature’s Benefits to People,” a key component of the IPBES’s analytical conceptual frameworks, was renamed to “Nature’s Contributions to People” (NCP) by the October 2016 decision of the platform’s Multidisciplinary Expert Panel (MEP) for the following two reasons (see IPBES/5/INF/24):
  1. The word “benefits”, with its strongly positive connotation, wrongly conveyed the idea that negative contributions from nature towards peoples’ good quality of life would be excluded.
  2. The different meanings of the word “benefits” in common speech in different languages as well as in the social sciences and the valuation literature represented potential sources of confusion. 
Therefore, NCP represents of two contributions that people obtain from nature (Pascual et al., 2017):
  1. All the positive contributions or benefits
  2. Occasionally negative contributions, losses or detriments
So, I have updated the Analytical Conceptual Frameworks of IPBES. Please note that “only images and web-links” are updated. All the remaining are the same.

Analytical Conceptual Frameworks of IPBES: An Update

Now the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Reports (a.k.a. AR5) are all released except the Synthesis part. There is a relatively new IPCC-like intergovernmental organization focusing on biodiversity and ecosystem services.
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, or IPBES, has launched in 2012.
I welcome this new organization wholeheartedly. See, the title of my blog is "Energy and Ecology." If the IPCC is more about energy (as a means of climate change mitigation), the IPBES is more about ecology.
Just as the IPCC has done to connect science and policy since the publication of the First Assessment Report (FAR) in 1990, the IPBES is planning to generate timely assessment reports regularly for the world's policymakers. The first global assessment of the IPBES is scheduled to be published by 2018 and will replace the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (published by WRI, UNEP, the World Bank, and UNDP in 2005) as the most authoritative report on the status of the Earth's biomes and ecosystems.
The following figures are a beautified version of the IPBES's analytical conceptual framework and operational conceptual model drawn by the Platform's experts at the 2013 IPBES's second Plenary (IPBES-2). These figures will provide a basis of future IPBES studies. In the analytical framework (Figure 1), there are six building-blocks and two big arrows representing spatial and temporal scales each. The operational model (Figure 2) explains how science and policy interacts with each other through the IPBES processes, while the analytical framework supports the four functions of the IPBES – knowledge generation, assessments, policy support tools and methodologies, and capacity-building.
These figures appear to be influenced by the conceptual framework of the United Kingdom's 2011 National Ecosystem Assessment (2011) as well as that of the United Nations Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Interestingly, the IPBES analytical conceptual framework has made the UK NEA framework updated as manifested in its follow-on phase report (2014) (Figure 3). A detailed explanation of Figures 1 and 2 can be found in the IPBES-2 report (2014) and could be compared with the conceptual framework of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

Figure 1. IPBES Analytical Conceptual Framework
(vector [emf] image: http://j.mp/IPBES-ACF)

Source: My drawing based on IPBES-5.

Figure 2. Operational Conceptual Model of the IPBES
(vector [emf] image: http://j.mp/IPBES-OCM)

Source: My drawing based on IPBES-5.

Figure 3. UK NEA Follow-on Phase Ecosystem Services Conceptual Framework

Source: My drawing based on UK NEA FO.

Reference: Pascual, U., Balvanera, P., Díaz, S., Pataki, G., Roth, E., Stenseke, M., . . . Yagi, N. (2017). Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 7–16. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006