renewable energy technology case study

• Jump to the top navigation
• Jump to the search field
• Jump to the main content
• Jump to the footer

• Our strategic direction

Subscribe to email updates

• Legislation and regulations
• Internal review of decisions
• About the Clean Energy Regulator
• Complaints handling policy
• Compliance policy for enforceable undertakings
• Operations during COVID-19
• About sitemap

Emissions Reduction Fund

• ACCU Scheme methods
• Method reviews
• ERF sitemap
• NGER sitemap
• RET sitemap
• Industry assistance
• Unit shortfall charges
• Information about units
• Carbon Pricing Mechanism sitemap
• Case studies
• Consultation Hub sitemap

Data and information

• About Carbon Markets
• Market contacts
• Contracts for carbon and renewable market trades
• Carbon market licensing requirements
• Buying ACCUs
• Quarterly Carbon Market Reports
• Australian Carbon Exchange
• Guarantee of Origin
• Purchasing ACCUs with co-benefits
• Markets sitemap
• About the media centre
• Media centre sitemap
• Opening an ANREU account
• Using emissions units as security
• History of the ANREU
• Supporting the Emissions Reduction Fund
• Supporting the Kyoto Protocol
• ANREU sitemap

Client Portal

• Identified issues
• EERS sitemap
• Online Services
• REC Registry
• Our systems sitemap
• Solar Panel Validation Initiative

Renewable-Energy-Target-case-studies //

• Emissions reduction case studies
• Renewable Energy Target case studies Currently selected

Renewable energy generation case studies

Suggested reading.

• About the Emissions Reduction Fund
• About the Renewable Energy Target
• About the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme

To power our homes and businesses, Australia generates electricity from coal and gas fired power stations, as well as a range of renewable energy sources including large-scale hydropower facilities and wind farms, and small-scale solar hot water systems and solar rooftop panels.

The Renewable Energy Target scheme (RET) is designed to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases in the electricity sector and encourage the additional generation of electricity from sustainable and renewable sources.

Follow our renewable energy stories – they feature initiative and ground-breaking great work.

Small-scale renewable generation

Large-scale renewable generation, help available for not-for-profits to switch to renewable energy.

See the full case study for Help available for not-for-profits to switch to renewable energy .

Kindy kids go carbon neutral at Albert Park Kinder

Albert Park Kinder have helped break new ground as Australia’s first carbon neutral kindergarten. With the support of the community, Albert Park has installed solar panels and embraced clean energy.

See the full case study for Kindy kids go carbon neutral at Albert Park Kinder .

Solar is a bright approach to sustainable retirement living

Jen Wetselaar built a custom solar passive home, designed for her retirement living. Through smart planning, her 5-kilowatt system creates enough energy for 2 households.

See the full case study for Solar is a bright approach to sustainable retirement living .

Community solar sees Old Beechworth Gaol in a new light

What do Australia’s gold rush bushrangers, the picturesque town of Beechworth and community-owned solar power have in common? They all share a space at the Old Beechworth Gaol!

See the full case study for Community solar sees Old Beechworth Gaol in a new light .

Community housing powers ahead with solar energy

Melbourne company Allume has made the benefits of solar power possible for the tenants of community housing provider Housing Choices’ Altona apartments. Using their SolShare technology, Allume has worked with Housing Choices’ tenants to install a solar system that delivers financial and environmental benefits while retaining separate metering and choice of energy supplier.

See the full case study for Housing Choices community solar project .

Rooftop solar passion

Australians have fallen in love with solar power. One in every four homes across the country now has a system operating on its roof, and the Clean Energy Regulator is currently processing around 7,000 applications every week or more.

See the full case study for Rooftop solar passion .

Byron Bay solar powered train

The sunny beaches of Byron Bay are home to the world’s first fully solar powered train. Operated by the Byron Bay Railroad Company, the Byron Bay Solar Train is powered by 6.6 kW of panels on the train’s roof and boosted by a further 30 kW of panel on the roof of the station storage shed.

See the full case study for Byron Bay Railroad Company .

Solar power protecting our maritime treasures

Sydney’s Australian Maritime Museum is using a unique solar system to power its strict climate control requirements, protecting some of the nation’s most iconic objects as well as the environment.

See the full case study for Australian National Maritime Museum.

Renewables companies moving with the times: Badgingarra Wind Farm

In the rural plains of Western Australia, the Badgingarra Wind Farm produces enough electricity for 115,000 homes. It’s 37 wind turbines feature unique, curved blades that twist and turn while spinning in the wind, designed to be aeroelastic and extremely efficient.

See the full case study for Badgingarra Wind Farm .

Australia's largest retailer serving fresh, green power

Woolworths Group has realised the benefits of commercial scale solar and recently celebrated the installation of the 150th rooftop solar panel system in its supermarket network. The retailer plans to increase this to 350 supermarket rooftops over the next 2 years and be net carbon positive by 2050.

See the full case study for Woolworths Group .

New England Solar

Australia's largest solar and battery project is nearing completion at Uralla, NSW. When fully online, it will generate enough zero emissions electricity for 250,000 homes.

See the full case study for New England Solar .

Related industries: hydrogen refuelling station

Australia's first public Hydrogen refuelling station, operated by ActewAGL in Canberra, marks a major milestone in the rollout of zero emissions vehicles in the ACT.

See the full case study for Canberra hydrogen refuelling station .

Redmud Green Energy - The Future of farming

In the Riverland region of South Australia, solar farms can be seen nestled amongst fields of crops, trees and grapevines. Landowners are integrating renewable energy into their existing farming practices, reactivating unused land parcels with solar farms. Many of these solar farms are part of the Redmud Green Energy project, which produces over 40 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity each year and reduces emissions by nearly 20,000 tonnes of carbon annually.

See the full case study for Redmud Green Energy .

Hepburn Wind Community Co-operative

Hepburn Wind is Australia’s first community owned wind farm. Located at Leonard’s Hill, 100 kms north-west of Melbourne, the 4.1 MW wind farm generates energy for over 2000 homes. The wind farm is owned and operated by a community cooperative, who undertook to raise the funds to build the farm. This was done via a combination of small local investors, Victorian State Governments grants and a loan from the Bendigo Bank.

See the full case study for Hepburn Wind .

Related industries: critical minerals

Our clean energy transition is well underway, with Australian mining playing a major role. Critical minerals are powering our renewable energy generation and communication systems, and their role in creating and using clean energy is expanding.

See the full case study about critical minerals .

Solar power for remote Indigenous communities

Many isolated Indigenous communities rely on diesel generators for their electricity. However, more and more remote communities are integrating solar power into their electricity generation systems, reducing fuels costs and their reliance on the transportation of diesel fuel into remote locations, and reducing carbon emissions.

See the full case study for solar power for remote Indigenous communities .

Cattle Hill Wind Farm

Innovative technology saves endangered eagles. The wind farm has a sophisticated system called IdentiFlight which uses artificial intelligence to identify any eagles flying towards the wind turbines at which point they temporarily shut down to prevent the eagles from colliding with turbine blades.

See the full case study for the Cattle Hill Wind Farm .

Numurkah Solar Farm

Victoria’s Numurkah Solar Farm is a trailblazer in renewable energy, combining sheep farming with the day-to-day operation of a solar farm - dispelling the myth that solar farms lock away large areas of otherwise productive farming land.

See the full case study for the Numurkah Solar Farm .

Documents on this page

Was this page useful, was this page useful.

About The Clean Energy Regulator

Carbon Pricing Mechanism

National Greenhouse And Energy Reporting

Renewable Energy Target

Our Systems And Their Resources

Information Hubs

Clean Energy Markets

Media Centre

Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee

Accessibility

Copyright Notice

Information Publication Scheme

Freedom of Information

The Clean Energy Regulator is a Government body responsible for accelerating carbon abatement for Australia. Follow us on: Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Youtube

Case Studies in Energy Transitions: A Special Collection

Dustin Mulvaney, San Jose State University, and Maria Petrova, Georgetown University, USA

INTRODUCTION:  The emphasis of this special collection of articles is case studies research and teaching activities about energy transitions—long term structural changes to energy systems, technologies, and patterns of use.

This curation of Case Studies in the Environment articles brings together papers that cover the core concepts, keywords, debates, best practices, techniques, tools, skills, and observations needed to improve our understandings of energy transitions. This special issue collection invites papers that engage with ideas and themes about energy transitions or that are incorporated into pedagogical activities. Examples topics in energy transitions include questions of temporal and spatial relevance on the magnitude of energy transitions, land use change, just transitions, life cycle assessment, finance/business, economics, behavioral concepts, socio-cultural change, policy tools and techniques, environmental justice issues, technological dependency, public participation, and carbon lock-in.

Green Energy from Garbage? A Case Study of Municipal Solid Waste’s Contested Inclusion in Maryland’s Renewable Portfolio Standard

Ingrid Behrsin, University of California, Davis, USA

Abstract:  Renewable portfolio standards (RPSs) are powerful state-level climate policy tools that set minimum renewable energy targets. They have been adopted by 29 states, in the United States (U.S.) as well as Washington, D.C., and have fueled much of the growth in the U.S. renewable energy sector. However, because these policy tools are state-driven, the technologies and fuel types included in each state’s RPS vary. In this article, I discuss the inclusion of municipal solid waste in Maryland’s RPS, and a social movement for environmental justice that has emerged around this decision. Given the prominence of RPSs in both fueling renewable energy adoption in the U.S., as well as in encouraging particular technologies, it is increasingly important to interrogate the types of technologies and fuel sources that climate policies like RPSs incentivize, and how they are received by the communities for which they are proposed. Thus, this article’s objective is to inspire critical thought about the classification schemes that govern renewable energy production.  Read more...

Renewable Energy on Tribal Lands: A Feasibility Study for a Biomass-to-Energy Plant on the Cocopah Reservation in Arizona

Lauren K. D’Souza, Renewable Resources Group LLC, Los Angeles, California, USA

William L. Ascher, Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, California, USA

Tanja Srebotnjak, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, California, USA

Abstract:  Native American reservations are among the most economically disadvantaged regions in the United States; lacking access to economic and educational opportunities that are exacerbated by “energy insecurity” due to insufficient connectivity to the electric grid and power outages. Local renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and biomass offer energy alternatives but their implementation encounters barriers such as lack of financing, infrastructure, and expertise, as well as divergent attitudes among tribal leaders. Biomass, in particular, could be a source of stable base-load power that is abundant and scalable in many rural communities. This case study examines the feasibility of a biomass energy plant on the Cocopah reservation in southwestern Arizona. It considers feedstock availability, cost and energy content, technology options, nameplate capacity, discount and interest rates, construction, operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, and alternative investment options.  Read more...

Barriers to the Uptake of Off-Grid Solar Lighting Products in Bihar

Sandeep Pai and Savannah Carr-Wilson, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary

Abstract:  The federal government of India and the state government of Bihar, India’s least electrified state, have always focused on grid expansion to bring power to those living without grid access. However, grid expansion has been slow. In Bihar, 83% of people still live without electricity, relying on dangerous kerosene lamps to light their homes. In the 1980s, an alternative—a market for solar home systems and solar lanterns—started to develop in Bihar. Yet, this market has failed to thrive, despite three decades of intervention by the government and activity by private companies. Today, fewer than 4.2% of unelectrified Bihar households use a solar lighting product. Based on interviews with key stakeholders, this case study found that the biggest obstacle to market growth is the government kerosene subsidy, which halves the price of kerosene, and makes people less interested in solar lighting products.  Read more...

Sidrap: A Study of the Factors That Led to the Development of Indonesia’s First Large-Scale Wind Farm

Martha Maulidia, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Paul Dargusch, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Peta Ashworth, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Agung Wicaksono, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jakarta, Indonesia

Abstract:  The first utility-scale (75 MW) wind farm facility in Indonesia (the “Sidrap” project) was launched in South Sulawesi in early 2018. In this case study, we assess how several factors contributed to the successful development of the Sidrap project including strong signals of support from the Indonesian Government; long-term local presence of private sector partners; familiarity of private sector partners with the risks and nuances of investing in Indonesia; and an innovative private-public sector partnership model. In the last 2 years, Indonesia’s electricity sector has changed much in terms of pricing policy and private sector involvement. Much effort has been directed toward the Indonesian Government meeting its renewable energy deployment target of 23% of the total energy mix by 2025. The question remains, however, on whether Indonesia will be able to develop additional renewable energy projects to Sidrap in the future, given the continuing changes and uncertainty in Indonesian’s renewable energy policy and politics.  Read more...

Using Concepts from the Study of Social Movements to Understand Community Response to Liquefied Natural Gas Development in Clatsop County, Oregon

Trang Tran, University of Alaska, Anchorage, USA

Casey L. Taylor, University of Delaware, Newark, USA

Hilary S. Boudet, Oregon State University, Corvallis, USA

Keith Baker, SUNY College at Brockport, USA

Holly L. Peterson, Oregon State University, Corvallis, USA

Abstract:  Shifts in natural gas supply and demand since the early 2000s have triggered proposals for import and export terminals in coastal locations around the United States. Demand for such facilities is likely to grow with increasing rates of natural gas exports. Clatsop County, Oregon, is one such location that experienced over 10 years of debate surrounding the development of these facilities. The first liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility was proposed in this area in 2004; the final was withdrawn in 2016. While residents expressed both support and opposition early on, opposition dominated by the end. Drawing on insights from the literature on social movements, we conduct a case study of community response to LNG proposals in Clatsop County. We show how opponents were able to successfully frame the potential risks of LNG in a manner that had strong community salience, allowing them to appropriate resources and create political opportunities to advance their cause and influence local and state decisions.  Read more...

Closing Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, 2009–2018: Decision-Making on Energy Investments Relevant to Climate Change

John H. Perkins, The Evergreen State College (Emeritus), Washington, DC, USA

Abstract:  Modern economies cannot function without electricity, and production of electric power affects citizens in many ways, including climate change. Production of electricity requires investments that easily reach billions of dollars, and streams of investment capital must be perpetual to procure fuel, build and maintain plants, and transmit electricity to customers. This case study addresses whether a California decision relevant to investments about generating electricity adequately considered competing concerns. In 2009, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E, a private, investor-owned utility) applied to renew the operating licenses of its two nuclear reactors at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (the “plant”). By 2016, PG&E had decided not to seek license renewal and asked the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to approve a price increase for its electricity to pay for specified expenses in closing the plant, which generated 24% of PG&E’s electricity.  Read more...

Pedagogy for the Ethical Dimensions of Energy Transitions from Ethiopia to Appalachia

Jen Fuller, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

Sharlissa Moore, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

Abstract:  Education on energy ethics is a crucial part of engaging students in learning about energy systems and energy transitions that needs further development. This article describes the use of case studies and active learning tools to achieve learning outcomes related to the ethical and social dimensions of energy. It discusses a daylong workshop held for undergraduate and graduate students at Michigan State University in February 2017 and evaluates pre- and postlearning outcomes. Two case studies are described that highlight ethical trade-offs in energy transitions. An international case study on Ethiopia and the Grand Renaissance Dam illustrates the benefits and drawbacks of cross-border electricity trade related to energy access, economic growth, and the energy-water nexus. A domestic case study on coal miners and coal towns in Appalachia examines the layered influences of place attachment and the challenges of economic diversification post-peak coal extraction.  Read more...

Socially Not Acceptable: Lessons from a Wind Farm Project in St-Valentin, Quebec

Louis Simard, University of Ottawa, Canada

Abstract:  Social acceptability appears as a new public norm that major projects must meet in order to be authorized and realized. This article proposes to analyze the case of a wind farm project in the municipality of St-Valentin, Quebec, Canada near the border with Vermont, which was cancelled by the government due to lack of social acceptance, in order to illustrate the importance of this norm today. The project involved the construction of 25 turbines to generate 52 MW of power. Launched in 2006, the project was already significantly under way by 2008; however, in 2011, the government permanently shelved it. Through a combination of document analysis and 11 interviews, we identified the main reasons for the lack of social acceptability: lack of upstream consultation from the developer and wrong scale planned for the consultation process, controversies surrounding the public decision-making process, profound contradictions between the community’s values and interests and the nature of the project, and perceptions of the impacts on the landscape and conflicting uses.  Read more...

Using a Community Vote for Wind Energy Development Decision-Making in King Island, Tasmania

R.M. Colvin, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

G. Bradd Witt, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Justine Lacey, Commonwealth Scientific and Industry Research Organisation (CSIRO), Brisbane, Australia

Abstract:  In 2012, a large scale wind energy project was proposed for development in King Island, Tasmania, Australia. The project proponents adopted what they described as a ‘best practice’ approach to community engagement; an approach expected to achieve positive outcomes for developer and community by maximising community involvement in decision-making, limiting social conflict, and enhancing the potential of achieving the social licence to operate. Despite this, the community experience during the time of the proposal was one of conflict and distress, and the proposal was eventually cancelled due to exogenous economic factors. This case study explores a key element of the engagement process—holding a community vote—that caused significant problems for people and process. The vote appeared to be a democratic means to facilitate community empowerment in the decision-making process. However, in this study, we show that the vote resulted in an increase in conflict and polarisation, challenged the legitimacy of the consultative process and credibility of the proponents, and ultimately led to legal actions taken by opponents against the proponent. Factors including voter eligibility, the benchmark for success of the vote, campaigning, and responses to the outcome of the vote are examined to demonstrate the complexity of decision-making for renewable energy and land use change more generally.  Read more...

Shooting for Perfection: Hawaii’s Goal of 100% Renewable Energy Use

Barry D. Solomon, Michigan Technological University, USA

Adam M. Wellstead, Michigan Technological University, USA

Abstract:  In the United States, 29 states, Washington, D.C. and three territories have adopted a mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) for their electric power systems, while eight states and one territory have set renewable energy goals. Many foreign nations have adopted an RPS as well. Thus far, almost all RPSs across the United States have met their interim goals with targets and timetables that vary widely. Hawaii’s RPS is the most ambitious, with a 100% target set for 2045 (though Vermont set a 75% target for 2032). This paper provides a case study of the Hawai’i RPS. The paper focuses on geographical issues and perspectives that may tease out the course of the states’ electricity future: sensitivity to climate change, population distribution, interisland rivalries, as well as the need for greater energy storage and complementary policies. An important complexity is the challenge of meeting electricity demand on six separate Hawaiian Islands (because of the lack of an interisland transmission cable), although all of them have substantial renewable energy resources.  Read more...

Evaluating Community Engagement and Benefit-Sharing Practices in Australian Wind Farm Development

Nina Lansbury Hall, The University of Queensland, Australia

Jarra Hicks, University of New South Wales, Australia

Taryn Lane, Embark, Victoria, Australia

Emily Wood, Independent Communications Contractor, Victoria, Australia

Abstract:  The wind industry is positioned to contribute significantly to a clean energy future, yet the level of community opposition has at times led to unviable projects. Social acceptance is crucial and can be improved in part through better practice community engagement and benefit-sharing. This case study provides a “snapshot” of current community engagement and benefit-sharing practices for Australian wind farms, with a particular emphasis on practices found to be enhancing positive social outcomes in communities. Five methods were used to gather views on effective engagement and benefit-sharing: a literature review, interviews and a survey of the wind industry, a Delphi panel, and a review of community engagement plans. The overarching finding was that each community engagement and benefit-sharing initiative should be tailored to a community’s context, needs and expectations as informed by community involvement. This requires moving away from a “one size fits all” approach. This case study is relevant to wind developers, energy regulators, local communities and renewable energy-focused non-government organizations. It is applicable beyond Australia to all contexts where wind farm development has encountered conflicted societal acceptance responses.  Read more...

Affiliations

• Recent Content
• All Content
• Special Collections
• Info for Authors
• Info for Reviewers
• Info for Librarians
• Editorial Team
• Prize Competition
• Online ISSN 2473-9510
• Copyright © 2024

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

• Ancient World
• Anthropology
• Communication
• Criminology & Criminal Justice
• Film & Media Studies
• Food & Wine
• Browse All Disciplines
• Browse All Courses
• Book Authors
• Booksellers
• Instructions
• Journal Authors
• Journal Editors
• Media & Journalists
• Planned Giving

About UC Press

• Press Releases
• Seasonal Catalog
• Acquisitions Editors
• Customer Service
• Exam/Desk Requests
• Media Inquiries
• Print-Disability
• Rights & Permissions
• UC Press Foundation
• © Copyright 2024 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Privacy policy    Accessibility

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Policy and practice reviews article, clean energy technology pathways from research to commercialization: policy and practice case studies.

• 1 Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden Colorado, CO, United States
• 2 U S Department of Energy, Washington, DC, United States
• 3 Renewable Energy Consulting Services, Inc, Palo Alto, CA, United States

Clean energy research and development (R and D) leading to commercial technologies is vital to economic development, technology competitiveness, and reduced environmental impact. Over the past 30 years, such efforts have advanced technology performance and reduced cost by leveraging network effects and economies of scale. After demonstrating promise in applied R and D, successful clean energy and energy efficiency technologies are incorporated into an initial product sold by the private sector. Despite its importance, processes by which first commercialization occurs are difficult to generalize while capturing specific insights from practitioners in markets and technologies. This paper presents a policy-focused qualitative assessment of the first commercialization of four diverse energy technologies: thin film photovoltaics, wind turbine blades, dual-stage refrigeration evaporators, and fuel cells for material handling equipment. Each technology presents distinct value propositions, markets, and regulatory drivers. The case studies indicate three common characteristics of successful first commercialization for new energy technologies: 1) good fit between the technology, R&D infrastructure, and public-private partnership models; 2) high degree of alignment of government regulations and R&D priorities with market forces; and 3) compatibility between time scales required for R&D, product development, and opportunities. These findings may inform energy investment decision-making, maximize benefits from R&D, and advance the transition to a low-emission future.

Introduction

Innovations in energy technologies are needed to mitigate the worst effects of climate change, improve resilience ( DOE, 2020 ), and confer other benefits ( Fuss et al., 2014 ; Hao, 2022 ). In energy, similar to all business sectors, market forces drive innovation ( Perez, 2002 ; Holmqvist, 2004 ; Markman et al., 2009 ), with governments mitigating risk for initial investments and addressing problems that markets cannot address themselves ( Janeway, 2012 ). Private sector commercializing of innovations, i.e., achieving financial benefits by selling useful and new developments, often depends on success in niche segments before expanding ( Porter, 2002 ). This pattern is particularly true for technologies that improve sustainability, for which robust sociotechnical models and research exists ( Geels, 2010 ; Smith et al., 2010 ; Jørgensen, 2012 ; Geels, 2018 ; Geels, 2019 ; Geddes and Schmidt, 2020 ). However, there are limits to these general theories, and specific, practical case studies are important complements to assess such transitions ( Kanger, 2021 ).

The specific barriers to commercializing new renewable power, sustainable transportation, and energy efficiency technologies present unique challenges. Such technologies often compete with mature incumbents ( Bonvillian and Weiss, 2015 ), including hydrocarbon, nuclear, and earlier-generation clean technologies ( Sivaram, 2017 ) in fragmented, regulated markets ( Energy Gov, 2020a ). Moreover, clean and efficient energy technologies are at varying stages of development Wind and solar are fully mature and commercialized ( Balachandra et al., 2010 ) while carbon capture and utilization ( Sanchez and Kammen, 2016 ) is neither. Investment needs for technologies at different stages and shortfalls described as “valley(s) of death” are well described ( Clyde et al., 1996 ; Brown et al., 2007 ); yet, relative to many externally funded businesses, clean energy companies have considerable time ( Balachandra et al., 2010 ) and capital requirements, which limit their growth rates and/or profit margins ( Powell et al., 2015 ) and make for poor fits with most venture capital ( Gaddy et al., 2017 ).

To lower barriers to clean and efficient energy technology development and commercialization, governments have had roles in energy innovation as sponsors, partners, regulators, customers, or some combination ( Fuchs, 2010 ; Bonvillian, 2018 ; Kattel and Mazzucato, 2018 ). Governments have directly influenced technology commercialization ( Zahra and Nielsen, 2002 ) via policy, including regulations, tariffs, taxes, rebates ( Bronzini and Piselli, 2016 ); legal fines and court rulings; research funding ( Azoulay et al., 2018 ; Goldstein et al., 2020 ); and by being a critical first customer for a new technology. Studies spanning many countries have explored the impact of government on technology commercialization extensively ( de Almeida, 1998 ; Foxon et al., 2005 ; Yeh, 2007 ; Mazzucato, 2013 ; Tse and Oluwatola, 2015 ; Lewis et al., 2017 ) including comparative studies of impact ( Popp, 2016 ; Goldstein et al., 2020 ; Popp et al., 2020 ). The public sector has also stimulated commercialization indirectly by supporting an “innovation ecosystem,” or R&D infrastructure that promotes cooperation and open shared resources between public ( Anadon et al., 2016 ) and private ( Oh et al., 2016 ; Pinto, 2020 ) organizations. In some situations, researchers have argued the impact of government policy on technology development has been equal to or greater than prices and market forces ( Wiser, 2000 ; Jacobsson and Lauber, 2006 ).

The rate of technology development and diffusion also depends on business factors, including the stage of commercialization for investment ( Nevens et al., 1990 ; Murphy et al., 2003 ), corporate culture ( Nevens et al., 1990 ; Treacy and Wiersema, 2007 ), and management focus ( Buckley-Golder et al., 1984 ; Christensen, 2015 ). For clean and efficient energy technologies, increased attention to environmental and social impacts has helped attract capital, though such impacts have been insufficient to entirely realign investor priorities ( Balachandra et al., 2010 ) or customers’ tolerance for cost or technology risk ( Gompers and Lerner, 2001 ; Brown et al., 2007 ; Verbruggen et al., 2010 ; Gross et al., 2018 ). In practice, adoption of new technology occurs only if it presents value that is unavailable elsewhere ( von Hippel, 1988 ).

Considering the intense and diverse risks entailed by any business operation ( Hall and Woodward, 2010 ) and especially new ventures ( Linton and Walsh, 2003 ; Popp et al., 2020 ), the barrier to technology diffusion decreases once a successful product exists. This fact highlights the importance of the initial private sector commercialization of clean and efficient energy technologies, and the paths these technologies take to their respective first markets may therefore contain insights for clean tech commercialization.

The purpose of this policy and practice review paper is to evaluate the conditions and identify generalizable approaches for successful first commercialization of clean energy technologies, a rarely studied phase of research and demonstration and a technology sector of considerably less focus in the literature compared to consumer products. The paper seeks to inform research investment by government program managers and industry decision-makers for technology commercialization in order to advance the transition to a low-emission future. To that end, this work presents four case studies detailing public-private partnerships that resulted in clean energy and energy efficient technology commercialization. While case study papers typically focus on a single technology or technology type, this paper uses diverse case studies to identify key details of the technologies’ transition from lab to first market with emphasis on the enabling factors of the innovation and the market landscape that led to initial success.

The paper does not cover later developments of these technologies toward full market acceptance, nor does it address current early or pre-commercial technologies; instead, the case studies focus on the critical period between advanced research demonstrations and first commercial market success. Common features relevant to broader decision-making in R&D and commercialization processes were identified across the case studies, drawing on primary sources and interviews with government program managers and industry partners that were involved in the adoption of these technologies. The conclusions present specific approaches for key stakeholders involved in energy technology commercialization—government research program managers, technology developers, and business decision makers—to further energy technology development and commercialization initiatives.

Methodology

The data and arguments put forth in this analysis came from primary sources based on a case study approach. These sources include one-on-one and panel interviews from subject matter experts who hold or have held critical leadership roles and contributed to the development of their respective technologies, and four workshops (one on each technology) conducted with government research sponsors. Over 50 experts contributed input over 6 months in mid-2020, including key individuals from the companies involved, their research partners from national laboratories, and the government program managers for each technology (see list of names in the Acknowledgements). The government subject matter experts included the U.S.-based program managers responsible for establishing targets and overseeing technology research programs in these specific areas. Industry partners and research collaborators interviewed were involved in the technology development and the relevant public-private partnerships. All participants were from the United States with one exception from Europe.

The case studies selected originated from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (EERE) portfolio of investments. The following criteria were used to select the cases for this paper:

Diversity of technology type within the broad category of clean energy and energy efficiency. Selected technologies covered renewable energy generation, energy efficiency, and transportation-related equipment that are implemented by power developers and manufacturers with the end users being power companies, industrial operators, and general consumers. This diversity enabled exploration of various drivers of first commercialization of dissimilar technologies and applications.

Diversity of commercialization approaches and strategies. Selected technologies were commercialized by both start-ups and established companies as completely new technologies to the market, major changes to an existing technology, and efficiency enhancements largely invisible to the consumer. This diversity enabled exploration of approaches to first commercialization by different types of organizations based on a variety of policy and market drivers.

Fully commercialized technology. Technologies that had achieved market success enabled identification of the pathways and elements around first commercialization, rather than selecting technologies that were still in development and had not completed their early commercial stage. This was a relatively small subset of technologies with a few caveats, as elaborated below.

Data for these case studies came from internal program metrics, contracts with industry, patent portfolios, published research papers, and government documents that recorded industry interviews and collaborations (and the terms and conditions that are associated with these interactions). Targeted interviews with questionnaires prepared for each technology were conducted with program managers, industry management, and researchers who were participants in the technology development at the time. Generalized energy technology development approaches were derived from these primary data collection sources through careful evaluation by case study participants and the authors. Specific source materials and interviews are referenced within each of the case studies presented in section 3.

Note that there are several areas of constraint within this study. First, the technologies selected for the case studies all reached some level of commercial success, although limited in some cases, since the focus is on first successful commercialization. As with any program directed toward high-risk innovation, many clean energy and energy efficiency technologies supported by government programs never move beyond the lab or demonstration stage or are partially commercialized before failure to fully reach the market ( Mufson, 2011 ; Kao, 2013 ). This paper focuses on success factors, whereas limits to success represent an area for future evaluation. Second, there is no counterfactual data on the development of these specific technologies without the involvement of DOE. So, the findings may be relevant to specific circumstances for U.S. government R&D programs and not universal strategies as every technology’s path to commercialization differs. Third, the study’s data and information were largely historically collected, not on-going real-time data collection during the development of a portfolio of technologies. This also represents a future area of study for new research and commercialization investments that is briefly discussed in the Conclusions.

Research and commercialization case studies

This section presents summaries and key findings pertinent to the development of four technologies—thin film photovoltaic solar panels, highly efficient wind turbine blades, dual-stage refrigeration evaporators, and fuel cells for material handling equipment—with generalized findings in section 4.

Thin film solar photovoltaics

Thin film cadmium telluride (CdTe) photovoltaic (PV) modules became a commercial product after nearly 30 years of R&D and collaboration among national labs, universities, and private companies ( Cheese et al., 2016 ). This case study focuses on the commercialization success of the company First Solar, which benefited from U.S. DOE solar research, directly received DOE funding in research partnerships in the 1980s–2000s, and subsequently led cost reductions for PV module commercialization ( Hegedus and Luque, 2005 ; Scheer and Schock, 2011 ; Cheese et al., 2016 ). This case study argues that addressing regulatory needs within this thin film PV technology’s first major market and establishing a proven product at a price and time for a market that was ready for it, led to its early success.

DOE collaboration generated an innovation ecosystem of thin film PV research that made key advances in CdTe PV technology by funding universities and industrial partnerships from the late 1980s to early 2000s, primarily through programs at the DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). An early notable advance during this period was the demonstration of 15.8% cell efficiency (a record at the time) ( Britt and Ferekides, 1993 ) using a cadmium chloride (CdCl 2 ) heat treating process (US Patent 4873198). First Solar co-developed a high-rate vapor transport deposition manufacturing technique (US 5945163) to produce CdTe-based panels at a larger scale—an alternative to the slower, costlier close space sublimation manufacturing process. With suitable device efficiency and scalable manufacturing procedures in place, R&D focus shifted to testing and validation of product reliability. First Solar used testing standards, product quality certifications, and outdoor testing facilities funded by DOE and led by Arizona State University and NREL to prove by 2003 that its modules were ready to enter the solar market. Figure 1 shows a 0.6-kW CdTe test array at NREL’s outdoor testing facility, as well as the structure of a CdTe solar cell.

FIGURE 1 . A 0.6 kW First Solar CdTe PV test array installed June 1995 at NREL’s Outdoor Test Facility (A) and CdTe PV cell structure (B) .

First Solar entered Germany’s major solar market in the 2000s. To do this, First Solar’s modules needed to meet energy performance and regulatory requirements, which included electronic waste regulation and restrictions on the use of certain toxic substances like cadmium (Directive 2002/96/ EC, 2003 ). In 2004, the European Union (EU) Commission evaluated these policies through a workshop on life-cycle analysis and recycling and disseminated DOE-funded research on CdTe from the DOE’s PV Environmental Health and Safety Assessment and Assistance Center at Brookhaven National Laboratory. This effort helped resolve concerns about emissions and recyclability of CdTe PV modules with independent, peer-reviewed studies. Later in 2004, First Solar secured its first contract for its compound thin semiconductor modules in the German PV market—a commercial turning point for CdTe p V. In 2005, First Solar announced a module takeback and recycling program to respond to evolving EU policy directives. These efforts helped communicate First Solar’s responsiveness to regulatory issues, and they addressed public perception of risk sufficiently to access key markets.

CdTe modules are less efficient than silicon-based panels, but owing to their reduced manufacturing costs, they led the lowest price per watt from the mid-2000s until the mid-2010s ( Figure 2 ) ( First Solar Inc, 2020 ; Fraunhofer Institute of Solar Energy Systems, 2020 ; Mints, 2020 ). Significant demand for photovoltaics in the European market during this time coincided with insufficient residual wafers from integrated circuit silicon, as well as a temporary shortage in polysilicon, which were used to make silicon solar photovoltaics ( Photon Energy Group, 2020 ).

FIGURE 2 . First Solar’s production, capacity, and manufacturing cost enabled a decrease in module prices to levels lower than silicon module costs during an increase in polysilicon spot prices (which signaled underlying polysilicon market trends), producing a serendipitous window for CdTe module market entry. Cost per watt adjusted to be real values for 2019. Data sources: ( Bernreuter Research, 2020 ; First Solar Inc, 2020 ; Photon Energy Group, 2020 ).

Key Findings : The thin film solar PV case study identified the successful use of three key commercialization strategies: development of technology with many commercially relevant inputs through public/private partnerships, alignment of set technology cost goals and product development that achieved them, and timing compatibility of technology readiness and market opportunity. In this case, government funding over decades enabled foundational materials research and consistent testing standards, that could be taken up by industry as the technology neared commercial readiness. Chance also favored a prepared company with the right product at the right time: CdTe photovoltaics of proven reliability were a lower-cost replacement in a clean energy market with an open window of opportunity, allowing the early commercialization success of this solar technology.

Wind blade improvements

Between 1995 and 2008, a funded ecosystem of universities, national labs, and private companies pursued advances in wind turbine blade design agnostic to a specific approach or design solution. This initiative was conceived and managed by Sandia National Laboratories, in partnership with NREL, and culminated in innovations that substantially increased adoption of wind energy and decreased the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for wind ( Larwood et al., 2014 ). From 2009 through 2018, wind energy prices, as indicated by executed power purchase agreements, decreased by over 60% (R. Wiser et al., 2021 ), holding steady from 2018 to 2021. Although several factors contributed, wind subject matter experts identify improved blade designs as one of the largest innovation factors contributing to wind energy technology cost reductions during this period. This case considers blade design advances and the enabling R&D environment that ultimately led to LCOE improvements, and thus to early market success.

Historically, blade lengths have increased over time to capture more energy. With traditional blade designs, the corresponding increase in the blade mass incurred costs not justified by the associated increase in energy capture. The longer, heavier blades resulted in higher loads and increased cost throughout the turbine system. The exploration in the early 2000s of blade design advances for wind turbine system optimization led to the development of turbine blades with flat backs and bend-twist coupling geometries. These two separate innovations, developed in parallel, allowed for significantly longer blades and thus more energy delivered by each turbine without compromising reliability.

The bend-twist innovation is an inherent structural design for blades to twist as they experienced a wind gust, thus passively reducing the pitch of the blade and lowering the load ( Figure 3 ). This technology was much simpler in concept and operation than contemporary suggestions to change blade pitch with active aerodynamic control devices requiring multiple actuators and moving parts. The flat-back design creates a structurally enhanced portion of the blade closest to the connection to the hub by flattening the trailing edge while the outboard portion remains shaped like a traditional airfoil. Flat-back blades balance ease of manufacturing, aerodynamic performance, and structural strength while reducing weight and enabling a longer, more reliable blade ( Miller et al., 2018 ).

FIGURE 3 . Digital rendering of a modern bend-twist flat backed wind turbine blade. Cross sectional view of the flat back is seen in the upper left corner.

The combination of bend-twist and flat-back design enabled longer blades with less mass ( Paquette and Veers, 2009 ). Figure 4 illustrates industry trends in rotor mass and diameter before and after the bend-twist and flat-back innovations ( Thewindpower, 2020 ).

FIGURE 4 . Rotor mass in tons vs rotor diameter in meters for Siemens wind turbine products with trend lines fit before (blue triangles) and after (green circles) the adoption of bend-twist coupling and flatback airfoils (2008). Significant reduction in scaling trends enables larger rotors and lower levelized cost of energy. Data source: ( Thewindpower, 2020 ).

The genesis of these design concepts was in the aerospace industry, and academic papers and presentations in open fora documented their innovative extension to wind turbine blades. As the flat-back and bend-twist designs proved out in the R&D ecosystem, private companies adapted the innovations to their own proprietary blades and analysis tools. There were no patents protecting the fundamental applications to wind blades. There were, however, demanding engineering and manufacturing requirements, especially for bend-twist blades, which deterred smaller and less engineering-focused firms. The twin considerations of intellectual property and engineering complexities have shifted focus in the wind turbine industry away from patents toward trade secrets and the development of proprietary internal computational design and analysis tools. Ultimately, industry responsiveness to flat-back and bend-twist coupled blade designs led to innovations that were commercially successful in first markets and, combined with related supporting design tools, drove diversity in blades across the industry, serving as differentiators across companies.

Key Findings: Public-private partnerships that connect universities and private companies with national lab research infrastructure, along with a selectively open approach to intellectual property, spurred the development of advanced wind blade designs. In this case, government played a convening role for innovation in a nascent industry and funded shared research user facilities. In turn, the wind turbine industry successfully commercialized the resulting advanced engineering designs that overcome the tradeoff between rotor diameter and mass inherent to incumbent technologies. The resulting decrease in LCOE, which wind technologists estimate to be nearly 33%, enabled significant wind power expansion post-2008 and led to a worldwide market over $100 billion per year ( Global Wind Energy Council, 2019 ). Given that most major commercial turbines now use elements of flat-back and/or bend twist innovation in their turbine designs, these innovations had a substantial impact on wind deployment and the global economy.

Efficiency in refrigerators

Refrigerators and freezers account for ∼7% of the total electricity usage in U.S. homes, or 105 billion kilowatt-hours and 74 million metric tons of CO 2 annually ( EIA, 2020 ; Energy Star Portfolio Manager, 2020 ). Historically, the bulk of this electricity demand has driven vapor compression to achieve cooling with a single compressor, evaporator, and condenser. This design unavoidably mixes air between the fresh food and freezer compartments, causing fresh food to lose moisture that forms frost on the evaporator coil. Inadequate or over-cooling degrades food preservation quality and is difficult to prevent with a single evaporator, which cannot simultaneously accommodate the different cooling requirements for the two separate compartments. Two evaporators with a post-condenser valve system allows each evaporator and heat exchanger to receive the correct amount of flow for the cooling load, while increasing energy efficiency (see Figure 5 ). However, dual-evaporator systems driven by two compressors (i.e., two separate vapor compression systems) require extra components, driving up production costs.

FIGURE 5 . Dual evaporator flow and component diagram (Adapted from US Patent 9285161B2).

Higher costs may be unacceptable to manufacturers, who already have low margins from most refrigerator sales. Consumers are especially price sensitive when purchasing a refrigerator and may be unwilling to pay a premium for increased energy efficiency, opting instead to pay more for such design features as extra compartments or embedded touchscreens. These market forces incentivize manufacturers to invest enough into efficiency R&D to meet minimum efficiency standards, but little more. In this way, efficiency innovations may be driven more by minimum standards requirements than direct consumer demand. Figure 6 shows the annual energy use over time for units sold in a given year and highlights the step-like nature corresponding with new minimum efficiency standards.

FIGURE 6 . Average annual electricity use of new refrigerator-freezers and freezers. Data sources: ( Rosenfeld, 1999 ; Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers, 2010 ; AHAM, 2018 ).

Whirlpool Corporation and DOE began work on a single-compressor, dual-evaporator system in 2014 as part of a DOE initiative to increase appliance efficiency. Funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL) provided R&D resources and staffing in collaboration with Whirlpool. A cooperative R&D agreement allowed Whirlpool access to ORNL modeling tools and advanced experimental facilities to assist in the design, validation, and prototyping of this new technology while retaining ownership of the intellectual property. The team was able to demonstrate an advanced refrigerator design with more than 50% energy reduction per unit volume (as compared to the 2001 federal minimum efficiency standard), with a cost increase of less than $100. The innovation led to a family of 14 patents for Whirlpool and enabled the company to meet new minimum efficiency standards ( Energy Gov, 2020b ).

Key Findings: The refrigerator efficiency case study typifies a successful commercialization pathway driven by alignment between regulatory constraints and R&D priorities. In this case, the government collaborated with an established company through cooperative research agreements utilizing government research models and facilities. The progress in refrigerator efficiency mandated by standards and achieved by Whirlpool’s dual-evaporator technology spurred other companies to develop similar systems to meet the minimum efficiency requirements, until more R&D could be done on other components such as compressors and insulation materials. As those components achieved cost-competitiveness with the dual-evaporator system, a diversity of solutions to comply with standards emerged. Dual evaporator systems are still present on modern day refrigerators, primarily on higher-end units where cost is already at a premium level; lower-end models are simply equipped with higher efficiency and less complex components with advanced adaptive compressors emerging as a technology for highly efficient temperature control. The dual-stage evaporator thus served to satisfy the needs of the first-market conditions set by regulatory policy, and in turn compelled additional R&D of components that met similar needs with reduced complexity and cost.

Fuel cells for material handling equipment

Fuel cells can provide electricity via redox chemistry for stationary, transportation, and portable power applications. DOE has invested in hydrogen fuel cell research since the early 1990s, when successful fuel cell applications (such as in spacecraft and satellites) were too costly for commercial products. Today, large-scale follow-on investment occurs worldwide ( Hydrogen Society of Australia, 2020 ). This case study focuses on fuel cells deployed in forklift and other material handling equipment (MHE) and consider the unique compatibility of this niche market for the technology.

The “captive” nature of MHE fleets made them a practical fit as a first-commercialization target for fuel cells in transportation applications. Integrators forgo the need for a large network of hydrogen refueling stations across the country, opting instead for one location within a warehouse facility. Historically, gasoline-, propane-, or diesel-fueled engines powered MHE for outdoor operations while lead acid batteries powered indoor applications where emissions must be controlled. Lead acid battery-powered MHE exhibit performance issues at low charge, requires long charging and cool down times that can disrupt warehouse throughput, and have limitations in cold environments like refrigerated warehouses. Fuel-cell-powered MHE resolves these issues, as fuel cells do not emit harmful air pollutants or carbon dioxide at the point of operation, and they work in cold environments without degradation of performance ( Figure 7 ). These attributes can lead to reduction of labor costs associated with changing and recharging batteries by as much as 80% while also eliminating the need for battery rooms, shrinking the infrastructure footprint by 75% ( Ramsden, 2013 ).

FIGURE 7 . Fuel-cell-powered forklifts in a Sysco warehouse in Houston, where they operated in part in a refrigerated environment.

As potential entrants to this niche market in the late 2000s, fuel cell MHEs made a strong case for displacing lead acid battery-powered MHEs. Other emerging power technologies such as lithium-ion batteries were not yet price competitive. At the time, hybrid electric vehicle lithium-ion batteries needed a 3–5x cost decrease to achieve wide commercialization ( FY, 2009 ; Annual Progress Report for Energy Storage R&D, 2009). In 2009, funding from ARRA enabled a large-scale fuel cell MHE demonstration. Through competitive awards with industry, DOE deployed hundreds of hydrogen fuel-cell-powered lift trucks along with supporting systems (fueling infrastructure, data collection and analysis, and operator training). The U.S. Department of Defense also deployed 100 fuel-cell-powered lift trucks at three centers and an army base. A detailed analysis conducted by NREL documented the techno-economics of fuel cell MHE, summarizing the conditions where the technology was cost competitive ( Ramsden, 2013 ).

Throughout the 2010s, guidance and education originating from ARRA deployment and follow-on work led to the integration of 40,000 MH E units within the industry ( John, 2021 ). At the same time, technology competitors surged and the cost of lithium-ion batteries decreased beyond projections (89% since 2010) ( BloombergNEF, 2021 ). Additionally, these batteries’ recharge speed increased, and they gained acceptance in a variety of markets. Comparisons continued to show fuel cells’ utility for refueling in high throughput applications compared to similar fast charging batteries such as lithium-ion ( Cano et al., 2018 ). In the last year, some MHE manufacturers that had announced production manufacturing of fuel cell forklifts have pivoted to advertising forklifts that work with lithium-ion battery technology for similar use cases. The opening of the MHE market to new innovations created by fuel cell forklifts helped spawn further electrification of MHEs and interest from industry in converting to cleaner technologies ( Nuvera, 2021 ).

Key Findings: The fuel cell MHE case study demonstrates all three approaches for commercialization success, including collaboration between private industry and publicly funded research testing opportunities (e.g., ARRA DoD demonstration), R&D advancing technology performance that could meet market requirements, and technology that had performance advantages in time for addressable opportunities. In this case, the government support for research continued through full-scale demonstration funding and direct procurement of early commercial technologies for private and government facilities. Ultimately, MHEs powered by fuel cell technology achieved an overlap of technology readiness and market opportunity, demonstrating energy density, fast refueling, and fuel storage capacities that exceeded performances by competitive contemporary alternative technologies.

Generalized commercialization approaches for energy decisionmakers

Although the four case studies have distinct technologies and stakeholders, they also have common approaches that influenced the technologies’ commercial successes, described below, and summarized in Figure 8 . These approaches are relevant for all stakeholders interested in future innovation related to energy. In particular, success depended on a combination of three approaches, and while these have been mentioned in the literature, their application to energy technology R&D has not been made explicit until now. Also noted are key distinctions between market contexts for the four technologies.

FIGURE 8 . Graphical summary of common approaches and key distinctions across four case studies of first commercialization.

First, technology development and commercialization depend on technology fit with research infrastructure and public-private partnership models. Each case study featured collaboration between the private sector and a research institution with critical shared infrastructure supported by an innovation ecosystem. Private sector technology developers leveraged government funding in research capabilities, including testing facilities, standards, and independent analysts. Large energy test facilities are beyond the resources of many companies, especially those in a nascent industry (e.g., PV and wind in the late 1990s). Likewise, field validation and consensus standards often emerge from efforts no company can pursue on its own. In these cases, government often has an important role as a steward of shared resources—physical and informational—that are required for progress. Our findings indicate that at this stage, open access to intellectual property may benefit a nascent industry most broadly. For pre-commercial energy technologies, the long time horizons and competitive challenges mean that it is often necessary to identify and develop shared-use facilities and standards to meet needs through many unexpected technology and market developments. Because public agencies can take risks that private entities cannot, the government is often the first investor in any innovative area; these investments both de-risk and leverage private capital aimed at commercialization. Industry leaders who successfully engage government often begin collaborating on pre-commercial technology, followed by independent innovation that differentiates their companies’ products. Such strategies require significant knowledge of government programs, flexibility in contracting, and strong relationships among individual researchers. For example, with wind blade improvements, technologists collaborated across multiple institutions and companies within an open innovation ecosystem to share or discard ideas, stimulating rapid iteration to overcome technical hurdles. In other cases, individual companies collaborated more independently with government resources, as with the development of dual-evaporator systems for refrigerators.

The second area of commonality among the case studies was a high degree of alignment between government regulations, R&D priorities, and market forces. With extensive stakeholder input, government leaders and program managers publish strategic objectives (e.g., increase energy efficiency) and technical targets aimed at specific priorities to incent innovation. Given higher tolerance for technology risk in government than the private sector, program managers can follow a correspondingly longer path for commercialization. These paths may have a commercialization endpoint identified (e.g., PV panel cost per watt target) or related technology performance targets (e.g., seeking materials with fuel cell properties before reduction to practice), and often require revision in response to technological and external developments. In areas where there is a national objective (e.g., efficiency of refrigerators) but insufficient consumer demand to drive change, government programs may support meeting regulations and standards and enabling industry innovation through access to research and testing capabilities. Each case study technology catered to a specific target market that was in turn responsive to policy, regulation, economics, environment, and manufacturer needs. Fit between product and market is a well-established success factor, and clean energy and energy efficient technologies are no exception. However, unlike most consumer products where the market fit is to consumer demand, clean and efficient energy technologies must also meet specific economic and regulatory requirements, often while contributing toward government or societal objectives noted above.

Finally, each case study found compatibility between time scales required for R&D, product development, and addressable opportunities, including a degree of serendipity. Building on years of fundamental research, funding for later-stage technologies focused on demonstration and commercialization based on market requirements for success. Early development decisions addressed constraints such as environmental health, manufacturability, customer price sensitivity, and demand for drop-in solutions. The case studies profiled various timing compatibilities based on the stage of technology acceptance and market readiness. Highly efficient turbine blades and thin film solar PV advanced fundamentally new technologies, timed with increasing demand for low-emission energy sources—a high-risk market approach rewarded with rapidly increasing sales of renewable energy technologies. While less conspicuous, fuel cells and dual evaporators had performance advantages versus incumbents (e.g., reduced fueling time for MHE and increased efficiency across multiple cooling loads for refrigeration). These advantages led to inclusion in established products that have been viable first markets, and, as with any technology, further growth depends on overcoming increasing competition.

The diverse cases revealed a key distinction between new power generation technologies versus those that create incremental efficiency or energy source changes. Electricity suppliers have widely adopted the core energy generation technologies (thin film photovoltaic cells and efficient wind turbine blades), and these technologies continue to find success in the market. The dual-stage refrigeration evaporators and fuel cells for MHEs achieved lower market penetration as individual technologies. Instead, their development instigated an opening of the market to a multitude of options for cleaner or more efficient energy within their target technology. There are multiple explanations for this difference. First, there are national incentives and sub-national mandates for adoption of renewable power generation that do not exist for other technologies. Moreover, first commercialization of end-use technologies often introduces consumer-focused features (such as better food preservation or reduced equipment downtime) with efficiency improvements receiving lower priority.

Conclusions and policy implications

Commercialization pathways of energy technologies are as diverse as research fields and markets themselves. Each case involved an appropriate set of research policy tools for the stage of the technology development and the partners. Thin-film solar developed through decades of research funding and was enabled through standardized testing protocols. Wind blades improved through a government-convened innovation network and shared research facilities. Advances in refrigeration efficiency emerged from collaboration between government researchers and a motivated established company. Fuel cell equipment launched through direct procurement support after years of government funded technology research. While the specific approaches varied, these diverse case studies did allow generalizable conclusions for both the private and government sector.

Successful private sector decision makers have a deep knowledge of the technology as well as the market and relevant policies, and their strategies account for all these arenas. Leaders at successful companies take advantage of available research infrastructure, including opportunities for cost share and access to shared knowledge or other assets. The timing of such opportunities lends an element of serendipity to commercialization that favors technologies and organizations that are well-prepared, for example through familiarity with resources and priorities of research agencies, government regulators, and other stakeholders.

Government research program managers and policy makers have an array of policy tools to support first commercialization of technologies, although they should be applied differently based on the technology and opportunity. Research funding, shared-use facilities, technology targets, open innovation, and deployment incentives can create the success factors for new energy generating technologies. Regulations, standards, testing, and demonstrations enable advancement in efficiency and powering existing technologies. Every case relied on mission-driven, personalized engagement between government and other stakeholders—in industry, academia, standards-development organizations, and others—that informed ambitious but realistic strategic targets and forged partnerships around them. Together, these elements were essential to creating the first commercialization at the right time. They also establish a self-reinforcing cycle, where successful projects lead both to technology and market impact, and also encourage further engagement between stakeholders and government. R&D agencies have encouraged such cycles for solid-state lighting ( National Academies of Sciences, 2017 ; National Research Council (2013) , geothermal energy ( Burr, 2000 ), and in other cases.

This policy and practice review paper and similar business case studies highlight the need for a new approach to understanding success factors for commercialization. Commercialization and related industrial policy case studies are largely historical, retrospectively collecting data and conducting interviews to extract findings. A future approach for government and industry research program managers would be a proactive longitudinal study that would start with defining a set of measurable inputs and success metrics to be applied during research on a diverse portfolio of energy technologies. These data would be collected periodically and interviews with researchers and various stakeholders would be recorded in real-time, indexed, and archived. Over a decade or more of the technologies’ development through either failure, stagnation, or first commercialization, a set of analyzable information would become available to quantitatively model and statistically assess for common definable conditions for success. Ideally, the information might also be used to identify the preparedness needed to take advantage of serendipity to make the leap from research to successful energy product.

The case studies presented here demonstrate that productive interactions between innovative businesses and government have led repeatedly to successful first commercialization of clean energy and energy efficiency technologies. Together, they reveal generalized approaches to new research and interaction with industries comprising the clean energy economy. Future longitudinal and structured cross-cutting studies of energy technology research programs could further enable successful investment and commercialization of advanced energy technologies.

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the initial writing. Additionally, JE, WM, MM, BM, and BW contributed to the conceptualization, methodology, and revisions. BW also supported with funding.

This work was authored in part by the Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis (JISEA) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by U.S. DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Building Technologies Office. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE, the U.S. Government, or sponsors.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks for photos and graphic design to Dennis Schroeder ( Figure 1A ), Alfred Hicks ( Figure 1B ), Besiki Kazaishvili ( Figure 3 ), Jennifer Kurtz ( Figure 7 ), and Nicole Leon ( Figure 8 ). The authors would also like to thank the many experts we interviewed, who reviewed drafts, or otherwise contributed to this paper, including: Andenet Alemu, Jeff Alexander, Sam Baldwin, Garrett Barter, Erin Beaumont, Markus Beck, Jen Bristol, Steve Capanna, Tom Catania, Al Compaan, Fernando Corral, Tim Cortes, Andrea Crooms, Peter Devlin, David Feldman, David Eaglesham, Chris Ferekides, Steve Freilich, Christina Freyman, Vasilis Fthenakis, Nancy Garland, Sarah Garman, Jennifer Garson, Charlie Gay, Markus Gloeckler, Alberto Gomes, Marcos Gonzales-Harsha, Bill Hadley, Michael Heben, Mark Johnson, Stephanie Johnson, Becca Jones-Albertus, Richard King, Jennifer Kurtz, Jeff Logan, Sumanth Lokanath, Robert Margolis, Wyatt Metzger, Anne Miller, Steve Ringel, Doug Rose, Karma Sawyer, Jared S. Silvia, Jim Sites, Henrik Stiesdal, Martha Symko-Davies, Govindasamy Tamizhmani, Lenny Tinker, Christopher Tully, Paul Veers, Alan Ward, Johanna Wolfson, Jetta Wong, Leah Zibulsky and Ken Zweibel. We also thank our journal reviewers for their insightful comments.

Conflict of interest

Author ED is employed by Renewable Energy Consulting Services, Inc.

The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

AHAM. (2018). Trends in energy effeciency 2018 association of home appliance manufacturers. Available at: https://aham.org

Google Scholar

Almeida, E. L. F. (1998). Energy efficiency and the limits of market forces: The example of the electric motor market in France. Energy Policy 26 (8), 643–653. doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(98)00023-8

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anadon, L. D., Chan, G., Bin-Nun, A. Y., and Narayanamurti, V. (2016). The pressing energy innovation challenge of the US National Laboratories. Nat. Energy 1 (10), 16117. doi:10.1038/nenergy.2016.117

Azoulay, P., Fuchs, E., Goldstein, A. P., and Kearney, M. (2019). Funding breakthrough research: Promises and challenges of the "ARPA model". Innovation Policy Econ. 19, 69–96. doi:10.1086/699933

Balachandra, P., Kristle Nathan, H. S., and Reddy, B. S. (2010). Commercialization of sustainable energy technologies. Renew. Energy 35 (8), 1842–1851. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2009.12.020

Bernreuter Research (2020). Polysilicon price: Chart, forecast, history | bernreuter research. Available at: https://www.bernreuter.com/polysilicon/price-trend/#1981-2004-regular-pork-cycle-of-the-contract-price .

BloombergNEF (2021). Battery pack prices fall as market ramps up with market average at $156/kWh in 2019 BloombergNEF. Available at: https://about.bnef.com/blog/battery-pack-prices-fall-to-an-average-of-132-kwh-but-rising-commodity-prices-start-to-bite/ .

Bonvillian, W. B. (2018). DARPA and its ARPA-E and iarpa clones: A unique innovation organization model | industrial and corporate change . Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford Academic .

Bonvillian, W. B., and Weiss, C. (2015). Technological innovation in legacy sectors . Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press .

Britt, J., and Ferekides, C. (1993). Thin-film CdS/CdTe solar cell with 15.8% efficiency. Appl. Phys. Lett. 62 (22), 2851–2852. doi:10.1063/1.109629

Bronzini, R., and Piselli, P. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Res. Policy 45 (2), 442–457. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.008

Brown, J., Hendry, C., and Harborne, P. (2007). Developing radical technology for sustainable energy markets. Int. Small Bus. J. 25 (6), 603–629. doi:10.1177/0266242607082524

Buckley-Golder, D. H., Derwent, R. G., Langley, K. F., Walker, J. F., and Ward, A. V. (1984). Contribution of renewable energy technologies to future energy requirements. Statistician 33 (1), 111–132. doi:10.2307/2987719

Burr, R. (2000). OUT success stories: Diamond-cutter drill bits. Available at: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/14528 .

Cano, Z. P., Banham, D., Ye, S., Hintennach, A., Lu, J., Fowler, M., et al. (2018). Batteries and fuel cells for emerging electric vehicle markets. Nat. Energy 3 (4), 279–289. doi:10.1038/s41560-018-0108-1

Cheese, E., Mapes, M. K., Turo, K. M., and Jones-Albertus, R. E. (2016). “U.S. department of energy photovoltaics research evaluation and assessment,” in 2016 IEEE 43rd Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC) , 1 June 2016 (Berlin, Germany: IEEE ). doi:10.1109/PVSC.2016.7750314

Christensen, C. M. (2015). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail . Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Harvard Business Review Press .

Clyde, F., Claire, S., Leann, M., Richard, R., and Andee, R. (1996). Surviving the “valley of death”: A comparative analysis . Berlin, Germany: Springer .

Devlin, P., and Moreland, G. (2018). Industry deployed fuel cell powered lift trucks Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy . Available at: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/18002_industry_deployed_fc_powered_lift_trucks.pdf .

DOE (2020). Staff Report to the secretary on electricity markets and reliability | department of energy. Available at: https://www.energy.gov/staff-report-secretary-electricity-markets-and-reliability .

EC (2003). Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)-Joint declaration of the European Parliament. Available at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2002/96/oj/eng .

EIA (2020). Annual energy outlook 2020. Available at: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/AEO2020%20Full%20Report.pdf .

Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators, refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers (2010). Energy efficiency and renewable energy Office. Available at: https://beta.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2008-BT-STD-0012-0060.energy.gov .

Energy Gov (2020a). Implementation, certification and enforcement. Available at: https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/implementation-certification-and-enforcement.energy.gov .

Energy Star Portfolio Manager (2020). Source energy technical reference. Available at: https://portfoliomanager.energystar.gov/pdf/reference/Source%20Energy.pdf .

Energy.Gov (2020b). Quadrennial energy review: Second installment. Available at: https://www.energy.gov/policy/initiatives/quadrennial-energy-review-qer/quadrennial-energy-review-second-installment .

First Solar Inc (2020). Financials-SEC filings. Available at: https://investor.firstsolar.com/financials/sec-filings/default.aspx .

Foxon, T. J., Gross, R., Chase, A., Howes, J., Arnall, A., and Anderson, D. (2005). UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: Drivers, barriers and systems failures. Energy Policy 33 (16), 2123–2137. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.04.011

Fraunhofer Institute of Solar Energy Systems (2020). Photovoltaics Report . Freiberg, Germany: Fraunhofer ISE .

Fuchs, E. R. H. (2010). Rethinking the role of the state in technology development: DARPA and the case for embedded network governance. Res. Policy 39 (9), 1133–1147. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.07.003

Fuss, S., Canadell, J. G., Peters, G. P., Tavoni, M., Andrew, R. M., Ciais, P., et al. (2014). Betting on negative emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4 (10), 850–853. doi:10.1038/nclimate2392

FY (2009). Annual progress Report for energy storage R&D . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy , 380. Available at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2014/03/f8/2009_energy_storage.pdf .

Gaddy, B. E., Sivaram, V., Jones, T. B., and Wayman, L. (2017). Venture Capital and Cleantech: The wrong model for energy innovation. Energy Policy 102, 385–395. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.035

Geddes, A., and Schmidt, T. (2020). Integrating finance into the multi-level perspective: Technology niche-finance regime interactions and financial policy interventions. Res. Policy 49 (6), 103985. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.103985

Geels, F. (2018). Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 37, 224–231. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.010

Geels, F. (2010). Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Res. Policy 39 (4), 495–510. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.022

Geels, F. (2019). Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: A review of criticisms and elaborations of the multi-level perspective. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 39, 187–201. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009

Global Wind Energy Council (2019). Annual wind Report 2019. Available at: https://gwec.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Annual-Wind-Report_2019_digital_final_2r.pdf .

Goldstein, A., Doblinger, C., Baker, E., and Anadón, L. D. (2020). Startups supported by ARPA-E were more innovative than others but an investment gap may remain. Nat. Energy 5, 741–742. doi:10.1038/s41560-020-00691-8

Gompers, P., and Lerner, J. (2001). The venture capital revolution—American economic association. Available at: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.15.2.145 .

Gross, R., Hanna, R., Gambhir, A., Heptonstall, P., and Speirs, J. (2018). How long does innovation and commercialisation in the energy sectors take? Historical case studies of the timescale from invention to widespread commercialisation in energy supply and end use technology. Energy Policy 123, 682–699. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.061

Hall, R., and Woodward, S. (2010). The burden of the nondiversifiable risk of entrepreneurship—American economic association. Available at: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.100.3.1163 .

Hao, Y. (2022). Effect of economic indicators, renewable energy consumption and human development on climate change: An empirical analysis based on panel data of selected countries. Front. Energy Res. 10. doi:10.3389/fenrg.2022.841497

Hegedus, S. S., and Luque, A. (2005). “Status, trends, challenges and the bright future of solar electricity from photovoltaics,” in Handbook of photovoltaic science and engineering (Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons ), 1–43. doi:10.1002/0470014008.ch1

Holmqvist, M. (2004). Experiential learning processes of exploitation and exploration within and between organizations: An empirical study of product development. Organ. Sci. 15 (1), 70–81. doi:10.1287/orsc.1030.0056

Hydrogen Society of Australia (2020). The hydrogen highway Australia’s opportunity for global leadership in clean heavy transport . Perth: Hydrogen Society of Australia . Available at: https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/360985-InfraNomics-supporting-document.pdf .

Jacobsson, S., and Lauber, V. (2006). The politics and policy of energy system transformation-explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology. Energy Policy 34 (3), 256–276. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.029

Janeway, W. H. (2012). Doing capitalism in the innovation economy: Markets, speculation and the state . Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press .

John, J. (2021). Plug power raises $1B for US green hydrogen infrastructure build-out. Available at: https://greentechmedia.com/articles/read/plug-power-raises-1b-for-u.s-green-hydrogen-infrastructure-buildout .

Jørgensen, U. (2012). Mapping and navigating transitions-The multi-level perspective compared with arenas of development. Res. Policy 41 (6), 996–1010. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.001

Kanger, R. (2021). Rethinking the Multi-level Perspective for energy transitions: From regime life-cycle to explanatory typology of transition pathways. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 71, 101829. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101829

Kao, H. (2013). Beyond solyndra: Examining the department of Energy’s loan guarantee program . Williamsburg, Virginia: William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review , 86. Available at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr/vol37/iss2/4 .

Kattel, R., and Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policy and dynamic capabilities in the public sector. Industrial Corp. Change 27 (5), 787–801. doi:10.1093/icc/dty032

Larwood, S., van Dam, C. P., and Schow, D. (2014). Design studies of swept wind turbine blades. Renew. Energy 71, 563–571. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2014.05.050

Lewis, A., Oliver, S., Lymburner, L., Evans, B., Wyborn, L., Mueller, N., et al. (2017). The Australian geoscience data cube—foundations and lessons learned. Remote Sens. Environ. 202, 276–292. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.015

Linton, J., and Walsh, S. (2003). From bench to business Nature Materials. Available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/nmat882 .

Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., and Phan, P. H. (2009). Supply-side innovation and technology commercialization. J. Manag. Stud. 46 (4), 625–649. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00835.x

Mazzucato, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. Private sector myths . Cambridge: Anthem Press .

Miller, M., Slew, K. L., and Matida, E. (2018). The development of a flatback wind turbine airfoil family. Wind Energy 21 (12), 1372–1382. doi:10.1002/we.2260

Mints, P. (2020). SPV market research 2020 . San Francisco, California: SPV Market Research .

Mufson, S. (2011). Before Solyndra, a long history of failed government energy projects. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/before-solyndra-a-long-history-of-failed-government-energy-projects/2011/10/25/gIQA1xG0CN_story.html .

Murphy, L. M., Laboratory, N. R. E., Edwards, P. L., and Llc, A. G. (2003). Bridging the valley of death: Transitioning from public to private sector financing . Golden, Colorado: NREL . Available at: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy03/34036.pdf .

National Academies of Sciences (2017). Assessment of solid-state lighting, phase two . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press . doi:10.17226/24619Engineering, and medicine

National Research Council (2013). Assessment of advanced solid-state lighting . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press . doi:10.17226/18279

Nevens, T., Sumne, G., and Uttal, B. (1990). Commercializing technology: What the best companies do. Available at: https://hbr.org/1990/05/commercializing-technology-what-the-best-companies-do .

Nuvera (2021). Making ports greener. Available at: https://www.nuvera.com/ports .

Oh, D.-S., Phillips, F., Park, S., and Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation 54, 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.004

Paquette, J., and Veers, P. (2009). Increased rotor size through passive load control and weight reduction concepts . Brussels, Belgium: The European Wind Energy Association .

Perez, C. (2002). Technological revolutions and financial capital: The dynamics of bubbles and golden ages . Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar .

Photon Energy Group (2020). Reports investor relations Photon energy Group. Available at: http://www.photonenergy.com/reports .

Pinto, M. (2020). Open science for private interests? How the logic of open science contributes to the commercialization of research. Front. Res. Metrics Anal. 5. 588331. doi:10.3389/frma.2020.588331

Popp, D. (2016). Economic analysis of scientific publications and implications for energy research and development. Nat. Energy 1 (4), 1–8. doi:10.1038/nenergy.2016.20

Popp, D., Pless, J., Haščič, I., and Johnstone, N. (2020). Innovation and entrepreneurship in the energy sector . Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States: National Bureau of Economic Research . doi:10.3386/w27145

Porter, M. E. (2002). How competitive forces shape strategy . Milton Park, Abingdon-on-Thames, Oxfordshire United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis .

Powell, D., Fu, R., Horowitz, K., Basore, P., Woodhouse, M., and Buonassisi, T. (2015). The capital intensity of photovoltaics manufacturing: Barrier to scale and opportunity for innovation. Energy & Environ. Sci. 8 (12), 3395–3408. doi:10.1039/C5EE01509J

Ramsden, T. (2013). An evaluation of the total cost of ownership of fuel cell-powered material handling equipment . United States: Renewable Energy .

Rosenfeld, A. (1999). The art of eenrgy efficiency: Protecting the enviornment with better technology. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 24, 33–82. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.24.1.33

Sanchez, D., and Kammen, D. (2016). A commercialization strategy for carbon-negative energy | Nature Energy. Available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/nenergy20152 .

Scheer, R., and Schock, H.-W. (2011). Chalcogenide photovoltaics: Physics, technologies, and thin film devices. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Chalcogenide+Photovoltaics%3A+Physics%2C+Technologies%2C+and+Thin+Film+Devices-p-9783527314591 .

Sivaram, V. (2017). Unlocking clean energy issues in science and technology. Available at: https://issues.org/unlocking-clean-energy/ .

Smith, A., Voß, J., and Grin, J. (2010). Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Res. Policy 39 (4), 435–448. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.023

Thewindpower (2020). Wind energy database. Available at: https://www.thewindpower.net/index.php .

Treacy, M., and Wiersema, F. (2007). The discipline of market leaders: Choose your customers, narrow your focus, dominate your market . New York, United States: Basic Books .

Tse, L., and Oluwatola, O. (2015). Eval. Renew. Energy Technol. Transf. Dev. Ctries. Enabling Factors Barriers 6 (1), 10.

Verbruggen, A., Fischedick, M., Moomaw, W., Weir, T., Nadaï, A., Nilsson, L. J., et al. (2010). Renewable energy costs, potentials, barriers: Conceptual issues. Energy Policy 38 (2), 850–861. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.10.036

von Hippel, E. (1988). “Predicting the source of innovation: Lead users,” in The sources of innovation (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press ), 112–117.

Wiser, R., Bolinger, M., Hoen, B., Millstein, D., Rand, J., Barbose, G., et al. (2021). Land-based wind market Report . 2021 Edition. DOE/GO-102021-5611 . 47.

Wiser, R. H. (2000). The role of public policy in emerging green power markets: An analysis of marketer preferences. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 4 (2), 177–212. doi:10.1016/S1364-0321(99)00015-5

Yeh, S. (2007). An empirical analysis on the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles: The case of natural gas vehicles. Energy Policy 35 (11), 5865–5875. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2007.06.012

Zahra, S., and Nielsen, A. (2002). Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization—zahra—2002—strategic management journal—wiley online library. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ .

Keywords: renewable energy, energy policy, technology commercialization, photovoltaics, wind turbines, refrigeration, fuel cells

Citation: Engel-Cox JA, Merrill WG, Mapes MK, McKenney BC, Bouza AM, DeMeo E, Hubbard M, Miller EL, Tusing R and Walker BJ (2022) Clean energy technology pathways from research to commercialization: Policy and practice case studies. Front. Energy Res. 10:1011990. doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.1011990

Received: 04 August 2022; Accepted: 25 October 2022; Published: 09 November 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Engel-Cox, Merrill, Mapes, McKenney, Bouza, DeMeo, Hubbard, Miller, Tusing and Walker. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Jill A. Engel-Cox, [email protected]

There is a lot to consider when moving a clean energy technology out of the lab and into the market: how it compares against established technologies, its ability to attract venture capital, the impact of market forces, and much more. With support from the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), thousands of American innovators are working quickly to develop solutions that can mitigate the worst effects of climate change, but the rates of progress—and success—vary. In addition to satisfying consumer demand, successful clean energy technologies must meet economic and regulatory requirements, often while contributing to a governmental or societal objective.

Fuel-cell forklifts. Photo by Jennifer Kurtz, NREL.

EERE looked at different technology pathways to the marketplace to see whether general patterns emerged. Finding any similarities could clear the path to commercialization for more renewable-energy and energy-efficiency solutions. The goal was to identify impasses and avoid the “valley of death,” where innovative technologies fail to become successful products.

To this end, EERE and the Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis studied the commercialization pathways of four technologies: an improved wind-turbine design, thin-film solar photovoltaics, dual-stage evaporators in refrigeration, and fuel cells for material-handling equipment. An article describing the four case studies was published in Frontiers in Energy Research on November 9.

The first sale to a customer marks a crucial step in a clean technology product’s journey to widespread commercialization. For one of these case studies, fuel cells, these first customers emerged in the niche material-handling market, which has created new possibilities for hydrogen to disrupt legacy industries. For at least two other technologies—namely, dual-stage evaporators and thin film solar cells—unexpected developments affected the strategy for market entry. In each case, staying flexible proved beneficial.

The analysis also revealed several commonalities. Simply put, they represent the who, where, and when of the commercialization effort, and the alignment between government and market.

• Who: Each case involved partnerships between public and private entities—specifically, at least one public organization, such as a federal agency or national lab, and at least one company had closely collaborated. The companies were a range of sizes, the agencies varied, and the partnership structures were diverse. Built into these partnerships, however, were extended networks and personnel, more people who could facilitate planning and execution.
• Where: The partnerships came with existing infrastructure —facilities and resources for testing and validating the technologies, places with the tools and space to enable getting the work done.
• When: In each of the four cases, timing was everything. The analysis found compatibility among the time needed for researching and achieving results, time needed to develop the product, and opportunities to enter the market.​​​​​​​
• Alignment between government and market: Each technology in this study had a target market that was responsive to policy, regulation, economics, environment, and manufacturer needs. Enough of these factors—research and development priorities, government regulations, market forces—were in sync for these technologies to reach their crucial first markets.

Now EERE and others can take these findings into account when deciding which research and development projects to invest in. The results could rapidly bring technologies to market that help the United States build our clean energy future.

Notification: View the latest site access restrictions, updates, and resources related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) »

A Decade of Transformation: What We Have Learned Since RE Futures Showed What Was Possible

Ten Years After Visionary Renewable Electricity Futures Study Showed an 80% Renewable U.S. Grid Was Possible, NREL Experts Recount How They Have Built on Those Findings in the Decade Since—and What Is Next

June 6, 2022 | By Madeline Geocaris | Contact media relations

The year is 2012.

Wind generation is expanding rapidly in some regions of the United States. Still, wind and solar combined generate less than 3% of the U.S. electricity supply. Natural gas has reached record-low prices, and nearly 25 gigawatts of coal plants will retire over the next two years.

Energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions from the energy sector are increasing, but much of the world has not imagined a clean, renewable-based power grid. Until July of that year.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released the Renewable Electricity Futures Study , or “RE Futures”—the most comprehensive analysis of a high-renewable U.S. power system at that time.

Results showed the nation’s abundant and diverse renewable energy resources could feasibly, both technically and economically, supply 80% of U.S. electricity in 2050—with a significant fraction from wind and solar. As modeled, the power system could successfully balance supply and demand every hour of the day, in every region—marking a new era in NREL's power grid analysis.

Over the past decade, our research has largely confirmed the key conclusions from RE Futures and, in some ways, identified that it might have been a conservative snapshot of the future. From today's vantage point, it will likely be easier to hit 80% renewables—or higher—than what we originally thought.

—Trieu Mai, senior energy analyst, NREL

Groundbreaking Findings: A Shift in the Clean Energy Narrative

With funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), more than 110 experts from 35 organizations came together to explore whether a future U.S. power system with very high levels of renewable electricity generation was possible.

Using its now-publicly available Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model , NREL explored future power system scenarios at then unprecedented geographic and time resolution, with renewable generation levels ranging from 30% to 90%—focusing on 80%.

"We had been thinking for a while about how we could get to very high levels of renewable energy in our power sector analysis," said Sam Baldwin, chief science officer at DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, who came up with the idea for RE Futures and supported the study from beginning to end. "Studies at the time looked at renewable energy technologies individually, but that didn't consider the natural synergies between solar and wind and other resources like bioenergy, hydropower, and geothermal. It was incredibly fortunate that we had such an outstanding team of researchers across the entire renewable energy and energy efficiency community work on the study."

RE Futures' groundbreaking findings, published across four volumes, not only showed 80% was possible, but also there were many pathways to get there. To make that future a reality would require "a total transformation involving every element of the grid, from system planning through operation."

75,000+ downloads of RE Futures to date

Top 25 NREL publications of all time

Greentech Media's Interchange Podcast called RE Futures one of the most impactful pieces of research of the decade: "It was highly influential. … The study changed the narrative around clean energy and guided many studies that followed. It all started with RE Futures."

In the years that followed, NREL has collaborated with diverse organizations in the United States and beyond to explore possible pathways for power grid transformation to 80% or greater renewables—bringing forth new questions, new models, and new data to help find answers. "Over the past decade, our research has largely confirmed the key conclusions from RE Futures and, in some ways, identified that it might have been a conservative snapshot of the future," said Trieu Mai, senior energy analyst at NREL and co-author of the RE Futures study. "From today's vantage point, it will likely be easier to hit 80% renewables—or higher—than what we originally thought."

Here is what NREL's grid analysts have learned in the years since RE Futures.

Clean Energy Costs: Rapid Change Drives a Need for More Consistent Data

After the release of RE Futures, clean energy costs declined much faster than anyone expected.

RE Futures' main scenario assumed a utility-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) system in 2050 would cost between $2,200 and $2,700 per kilowatt. However, by 2020, a utility-scale PV system cost $1,000 per kilowatt.

RE Futures also estimated retail electricity price increases, reaching $29 to $60 per megawatt-hour in 2050 with 80% renewables. Today, studies estimate retail electricity prices of less than $5 per megawatt-hour in 2050 with 80% renewables.

"I don't think anybody really envisioned how quickly many of the technology advances would materialize," said Maureen Hand, NREL project lead of RE Futures and now air resources engineer for the California Air Resources Board.

Clean Energy Costs: RE Futures vs. Actual, 2010–2020

• Land-based Wind
• Utility-scale PV
• 8-hour Batteries

Over the last decade, the cost of clean energy technologies has declined faster than anyone expected or was estimated in RE Futures, as shown here with land-based wind, utility-scale solar, and 8-hour batteries. Note: the capital costs are in real 2020 dollars per kilowatt and the RE Futures estimates did not account for construction interest and interconnection costs.

In response to the rapid change, NREL launched a new effort in 2015 with support from DOE to ensure energy analyses use consistent, timely assumptions. Two products came out of the effort.

The Standard Scenarios provided a robust suite of defined scenarios for U.S. power sector evolution through 2050, and the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) included detailed cost and performance data for renewable and conventional technologies. Together, the free, open-source products offered a standard modeling approach to apply to all power system analyses.

Every year, NREL updates and releases the Standard Scenarios and ATB, which are used by energy analysts, modelers, and industry experts. The ATB has had over 85,000 users from 144 countries to date.

NREL is expanding both the Standard Scenarios and ATB to include a broader range of power sector technologies—and in 2020, the ATB included the transportation sector for the first time, offering a template for other sectors.

Text version

Electrification: Increasing Demand Could Fundamentally Change How We Operate the Future Grid

To understand whether a high-renewable power system was feasible, RE Futures analyzed future end-use electricity demand in buildings, transportation, and industrial sectors with increasing population and energy efficiency.

It was one of the few power grid studies at the time to consider flexible loads from plug-in electric vehicles, which made up less than 0.2% of vehicles on the road in 2012. RE Futures assumed 40% of vehicles would be electric in 2050.

Today, EVs have broken into the mass market. Ten percent of new cars globally are electric, with over 1.7 million on U.S. roads as of 2020. By mid-2021, plug-in electric vehicle sales surpassed 2 million for the first time.

To dive deep into the potential impacts of widespread electrification in all U.S. economic sectors—commercial and residential buildings, transportation, and industry—NREL launched the multiyear Electrification Futures Study (EFS) with funding from DOE.

NREL conducted groundbreaking national-scale simulations of U.S. power system hourly operations, costs, and emissions to understand the interactions between electrification, demand-side flexibility, and renewable energy deployment.

A series of one-day plots of future power system operations with high electrification and high renewable generation, modeled by the Electrification Futures Study. In the flexible load dispatch panel, the solid portion (above 0) represents shifted electricity consumption, and the lighter portion (below 0) represents increased electricity consumption. As more demand-side flexibility is added to the power system, the load shape changes, resulting in less curtailment, fewer ramp-ups of natural gas units, and less storage is used.

In the high electrification scenario—now assuming about 86% of vehicles are electric in 2050—the Electrification Futures Study modeled that electric load increases 67% in 2050 and installed capacity would need to double. Flexible loads from EV charging and operations of end-use equipment in buildings and industry help renewable generation meet new electrified demands and reduce annual emissions.

"Building on RE Futures, the Electrification Futures Study found that all sources of grid flexibility—including transmission and inter-regional power transfers, flexible generation, storage, and demand-side sources of flexibility—will likely be important for efficiently operating a power system with high electrification and high renewable energy deployment," said Caitlin Murphy, senior energy analyst at NREL and co-author of the Electrification Futures study.

Transmission: Unlocking a More Resilient, Flexible Grid

The role of the transmission system in a high-renewable power system was an important consideration in RE Futures.

The three major portions of the U.S. power system—the Western Interconnection, the Eastern Interconnection, and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas—operate virtually independently. Their few connections are aging rapidly and present operational challenges with increasing variable generation—offering an opportunity to modernize the grid.

NREL's foundational Western Wind and Solar Integration Study , released in three phases around the time of RE Futures, examined power system operations of integrating up to 35% wind and solar in large portions of the Eastern and Western Interconnections. The studies concluded that it is technically feasible to accommodate 35% wind and solar with operational changes, including much greater coordination of power system operations across larger geographic areas, scheduling generation on a sub-hourly basis, and increasing utilization of existing transmission.

RE Futures revealed that 80% renewable generation would require additional transmission to ensure power system flexibility—and it is more economical to build out transmission from sites with high-quality wind and solar, than to site wind and solar locations with lower-quality resources but closer to the load.

NREL built on that finding a few years later in the Eastern Renewable Generation Integration Study (ERGIS) . Using new high-performance computing capabilities and innovative visualization tools, NREL examined operations of the Eastern Interconnection—the largest power grid in the world—at the five-minute timescale with 30% wind and solar. Results showed the power system could operate at those levels, but flows of power across the Eastern Interconnection could change more rapidly and frequently—requiring greater coordination of regional grid operations.

ERGIS was the capstone of a family of detailed NREL-led grid integration studies of 30%–35% wind and solar, leading to studies with higher levels as U.S. renewable generation has increased.

In 2020, wind produced 8.4% of U.S. electricity, or enough to power more than 31 million homes—tripling since RE Futures was released. Most of the growth has taken place in Midwest and Southwest states, with Iowa, North Dakota, and Kansas generating enough wind and solar power to meet half of their electricity demand. Transmission upgrades have not kept up with the dramatic growth.

To understand the value of strengthening ties between the Eastern and Western grids, NREL launched the Interconnections Seam Study . Using enhanced computational and visualization capabilities first demonstrated in ERGIS, NREL modeled conceptual transmission designs under different scenarios through the year 2038.

"With variable renewable resources becoming a larger share of our nation's electricity supply, the ability to transfer those resources across regions could be incredibly valuable—whether that's in periods of power system stress, like extreme weather, or during a typical day to take advantage of the best available resources," said Greg Brinkman, NREL senior research engineer and co-author of the Interconnections Seam Study and RE Futures.

Results showed that, under all designs and scenarios, uniting the Eastern and Western U.S. electric grids would strengthen the power system's ability to share generation resources and flexibility across regions—providing reliable electricity and seeing cost savings.

NREL energy analyst Jonathan Ho presents on the Interconnection Seams Study. Photo by Werner Slocum, NREL

And NREL did not just explore expanding transmission across the U.S. grid. NREL took it to the continental level with the North American Renewable Integration Study , which modeled greater power-system coordination across all of North America and between regions within each country through 2050.

As modeled, expanding international transmission would provide up to $30 billion (2018 $US) of net value to the continental power system between 2020 and 2050—increasing power system reliability and enabling exchange of load and renewable generation diversity between regions.

The NREL team has also expanded its grid integration research beyond North America and offered expertise to India, the Philippines, Vietnam, China, and more—even informing country-specific and international clean energy plans.

Today, 70% of U.S. transmission lines are 25 years old or older or at full capacity. RE Futures' emphasis on the need for expanded transmission still rings true, with Congress and regulators at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission urging to rebuild America's critical infrastructure, including transmission expansion—which could pay for itself multiple times over.

Energy Storage: The Unexpected Player in a Low-Carbon Grid

When RE Futures was released, energy storage was equivalent to 2% of U.S. power capacity, nearly all of which was pumped-storage hydropower.

Still, RE Futures saw energy storage as another potentially important contributor of power system flexibility to support large-scale deployment of wind and solar. The study estimated there could be 152 gigawatts of storage capacity in 2050 , with most new storage additions coming from compressed air energy storage and pumped-storage hydropower. Lithium-ion batteries were not on the radar at the time because they averaged nearly $1,200 per kilowatt-hour.

However, lithium-ion battery prices rapidly fell in the subsequent years due to the rise of battery-powered EVs—dropping to about $130 per kilowatt-hour in 2020—and several other storage technologies entered the market. In addition, more instances of power system disruptions due to weather disasters drove a greater focus on maintaining a reliable and resilient power system. Suddenly, storage was poised to play a bigger role than expected.

NREL launched the multiyear Storage Futures Study with support from DOE's Energy Storage Grand Challenge . By adding new storage capabilities to ReEDS, NREL studied how much value storage could provide to the grid and behind the meter, how much could be economically deployed, and how high storage levels might impact power system operations.

Unlike RE Futures, the study focused primarily on the potential of lithium-ion batteries, given their recent and anticipated cost declines with the oncoming proliferation of EVs.

Estimated capital costs for 2- to 10-hour battery energy storage systems through 2050, modeled by the Storage Futures Study. Costs continue to drop rapidly through 2030 before beginning to level out, with less rapid declines through 2050.

The striking result across the six phases of the Storage Futures Study is that energy storage deployment has the potential to increase significantly—reaching at least five times today's capacity in 2050. These storage levels would enable integrating at least 80% renewables on the U.S. grid. As modeled, lithium-ion batteries will likely continue to dominate near-term deployments, but other technologies like closed-loop pumped hydropower and fuel cells for long-duration storage could become more cost-competitive in the future.

"Each phase of the Storage Futures Study indicated a potential coming wave of energy storage," said Nate Blair, NREL principal investigator of the study. "Overall, we find energy storage could play an important role in a flexible, resilient, low-carbon future grid."

Study results revealed energy storage could not only help the future grid operate more efficiently by meeting peak demand but also increase the use of new and existing transmission lines. At the same time, it could offset the need to build new polluting power plants.

"Since RE Futures, a new framework has emerged for storage deployment," said Paul Denholm, senior energy analyst at NREL and co-author of RE Futures and the Storage Futures Study. "This framework links storage duration with the value of services it can provide to the grid. As shorter-duration storage applications are met and storage costs continue to decline, opportunities for longer-duration storage will grow. In the future, we could see multiday or even seasonal storage."

Although energy storage is still a small fraction of the U.S. power sector today, NREL expects it will likely exceed what RE Futures thought and play an integral role in determining the cost-optimal grid mix of the future.

100% Clean Energy: Setting Sights on a New Target

By 2019, the cost of PV had dropped 71% for distributed PV and 80% for utility-scale PV since RE Futures. The 2 millionth solar PV system was installed in the United States, with an additional million installed by summer 2021. The cost of wind decreased 40% since RE Futures, even as performance improved.

U.S. electricity generation from renewable sources (23%) exceeded coal-fired generation (20%) for the first time in 2019—marking a new era in our energy landscape.

As of December 2020, more than 260 large corporations and 200 cities and counties in the United States pledged to meet 100% of their electricity needs with renewables over the coming decades—including Los Angeles, whose city council announced in 2016 a goal of 100% clean energy by 2045.

To determine data-driven pathways to reach this ambitious goal, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power partnered with NREL on the Los Angeles 100% Renewable Energy Study (LA100).

NREL scaled up its modeling and analysis capabilities to unprecedented levels. The team ran millions of simulations of future scenarios to evaluate a range of how LADWP's power system could evolve to 100% renewables—while maintaining reliable power for LA customers. The study was the most comprehensive, detailed analysis to date of an entirely renewable-based grid as complex as LA's.

This video shows a visualization of future electric vehicle loads in Los Angeles developed for the LA100 study.

Results showed LA's goal is achievable as soon as 2035 with rapid deployment of wind, solar, and storage technologies this decade—showing it is possible to go even further than RE Futures' then-visionary 80% target. And the same methodology from LA100 can be used for more cities seeking insights on the road to clean and equitable energy futures.

But LA100 also revealed that the most challenging—and costly—part of reaching a fully renewable grid is the final stretch: the last 10%–20% of energy demand that cannot be easily served by wind, solar, and conventional storage, but is crucial to maintaining reliability in the face of extreme events.

A few months after LA100's release, NREL published new research looking at that challenge at the national scale. NREL again used the ReEDS model, now including additional enhancements to quantify how different assumptions about how the power system might evolve can impact future system costs. The results show costs can increase nonlinearly for the last few percent toward 100%, which could drive interest in non-electric-sector investments that achieve similar decarbonization objectives with a lower total tab.

Energy Justice: Ensuring All Communities Reap the Benefits of Cleaner Grids

When RE Futures was published, energy justice had relatively recently emerged as a crosscutting research discipline for NREL, but the underlying challenge had existed for decades.

Power system planning has historically focused on prioritizing costs and efficiency over the experiences of some communities. Vulnerable communities have long endured the negative aspects of energy—like pollution, higher proportional household spending on energy bills, and utility shutoffs—without as many opportunities to access benefits like rooftop solar panels, energy efficiency programs, and well-paying energy jobs. Recently, efforts like the federal government's Justice40 Initiative have built momentum around making sure the benefits of cleaner power systems are delivered broadly to all communities—and this was a critical component of NREL's LA100 study.

In LA, almost 50% of census tracts are designated as disadvantaged. Recognizing this, the city of Los Angeles identified environmental justice as both a key motivation and an intended outcome for the study.

The LA100 study results revealed that while all communities in Los Angeles will share in the benefits of the clean energy transition, improving equity in participation and outcomes requires intentionally designed policies and programs.

The study also revealed the importance of embedding the community in the research process to ensure results reflect local concerns and priorities.

"Every phase of the LA100 study was guided by the LA100 Advisory Group, which included members of LA neighborhood councils, industry, city government, and others," said Jaquelin Cochran, NREL principal investigator of LA100. "We also worked directly with the broader community through one-on-one listening sessions with different environmental justice groups and public outreach events presented in both Spanish and English to ensure Spanish-speaking Angelenos could participate."

Members of NREL, LADWP, and the LA100 Advisory Group tour LADWP’s Pine Tree Wind and Solar Farm. Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL

After the LA100 study's release, LADWP again joined forces with NREL in 2021 on the new LA100 Equity Strategies project , which picks up where LA100 left off to ensure the city's transition to 100% carbon-free power is equitable.

The project will analyze how to improve or expand LADWP programs to achieve equity for disadvantaged communities, incorporating what community members themselves feel is needed to achieve more equitable outcomes. LA100 Equity Strategies will include a robust community engagement process with the goal of producing community-tailored results.

"NREL's vision means leading an energy transition in which solutions are inclusively designed and benefits are equitably distributed," said Kate Anderson, LA100 Equity Strategies lead at NREL. "With LA100 Equity Strategies, we are continuing our mission-driven work to support communities in becoming active participants in advancing their energy visions."

The Next Decade: Decarbonization Goals Drive Rapid—and Equitable—Clean Energy Deployment

Today, RE Futures' vision of 80% renewable energy for the United States is closer than ever, with ambitious federal emissions-reduction targets and ever-decreasing clean energy costs.

"It's incredible what we can achieve together when we put our minds to it," said Ryan Wiser, co-author of RE Futures and senior scientist at Lawrence Berkely National Laboratory. "RE Futures helped us imagine a U.S. economy powered by clean, renewable energy and gave us the fortitude to pursue the scientific advancements needed to see that vision through. What once seemed far-fetched has become normal as we think about deep, economy-wide decarbonization."

Between RE Futures and 2020, U.S. wind, solar, and geothermal generation increased at an annual compound growth rate of 15%. If we are able to overcome future challenges and this rate continues, wind, solar, and geothermal could produce enough electricity to meet all current U.S. electricity demand by 2035.

As the power system has undergone immense change, NREL has made analytical advances that enable studying future scenarios with greater detail and complexity—answering more questions about the future power grid and earning R&D 100 Awards . ReEDS just surpassed 1,000 external users since it became publicly available in 2019.

"The past decade we have learned a lot about potential energy transition solutions, and falling technology costs have opened the door to new possibilities," said Doug Arent, executive director of strategic public-private partnerships at NREL. "Now we are broadening our scope to the transformational level, focusing on how to increase the speed and scale of clean energy economies around the world through continued research, partnerships, and knowledge sharing."

NREL is accelerating energy system decarbonization both globally through the Net Zero World Initiative and 21st Century Power Partnership and domestically through a variety of initiatives, including Accelerating Clean Energy at Scale . These broad-scale collaborations signal growing readiness to move from theoretical explorations to real-world deployment of clean energy solutions.

While there has been great progress since RE Futures, work still remains.

The energy transition has brought new, critically important questions that were not studied in RE Futures: siting considerations, energy equity concerns, and policy, regulatory, and market design challenges. Plus, there are still several technical considerations that need to be explored for integrating large amounts of renewables, like how to maintain inertia or fault protection on the grid—services that are traditionally supported by conventional generators.

"These are complex, multidisciplinary challenges," Trieu Mai said. "These questions will require more collaboration and next-level power grid analysis over the coming decade. Just imagine the next decade of breakthroughs."

Learn more about energy analysis and grid modernization at NREL.

Enabling renewable energy with battery energy storage systems

With the next phase of Paris Agreement goals rapidly approaching, governments and organizations everywhere are looking to increase the adoption of renewable-energy sources. Some of the regions with the heaviest use of energy have extra incentives for pursuing alternatives to traditional energy. In Europe, the incentive stems from an energy crisis. In the United States, it comes courtesy of the Inflation Reduction Act, a 2022 law that allocates $370 billion to clean-energy investments.

About the authors

These developments are propelling the market for battery energy storage systems (BESS). Battery storage is an essential enabler of renewable-energy generation, helping alternatives make a steady contribution to the world’s energy needs despite the inherently intermittent character of the underlying sources. The flexibility BESS provides will make it integral to applications such as peak shaving, self-consumption optimization, and backup power in the event of outages. Those applications are starting to become more profitable as battery prices fall.

All of this has created a significant opportunity. More than $5 billion was invested in BESS in 2022, according to our analysis—almost a threefold increase from the previous year. We expect the global BESS market to reach between $120 billion and $150 billion by 2030, more than double its size today. But it’s still a fragmented market, with many providers wondering where and how to compete. Now is the time to figure out where the best opportunities will be in the rapidly accelerating BESS market and to start preparing for them.

Here are some questions—and answers—to help BESS players formulate their strategies.

What are the main opportunities?

The best way to get a sense of the opportunities associated with BESS is to segment the market by the applications and sizes of users. There are three segments in BESS: front-of-the-meter (FTM) utility-scale installations, which are typically larger than ten megawatt-hours (MWh); behind-the-meter (BTM) commercial and industrial installations, which typically range from 30 kilowatt-hours (kWh) to ten MWh; and BTM residential installations, which are usually less than 30 kWh (Exhibit 1).

We expect utility-scale BESS, which already accounts for the bulk of new annual capacity, to grow around 29 percent per year for the rest of this decade—the fastest of the three segments. The 450 to 620 gigawatt-hours (GWh) in annual utility-scale installations forecast for 2030 would give utility-scale BESS a share of up to 90 percent of the total market in that year (Exhibit 2).

Customers of FTM installations are primarily utilities, grid operators, and renewable developers looking to balance the intermittency of renewables, provide grid stability services, or defer costly investments to their grid. The BESS providers in this segment generally are vertically integrated battery producers or large system integrators. They will differentiate themselves on the basis of cost and scale, reliability, project management track record, and ability to develop energy management systems and software solutions for grid optimization and trading.

BESS deployments are already happening on a very large scale. One US energy company is working on a BESS project that could eventually have a capacity of six GWh. Another US company, with business interests inside and outside of energy, has already surpassed that, having reached 6.5 GWh in BESS deployments in 2022. Much of the money pouring into BESS now is going toward services that increase energy providers’ flexibility—for instance, through firm frequency response. In the long run, BESS growth will stem more from the build-out of solar parks and wind farms, which will need batteries to handle their short-duration storage needs.

Revenue models for FTM utility-scale BESS depend heavily on the dynamics of the regions that providers are entering. Most utility-scale BESS players pursue a strategy of revenue stacking, or assembling revenues from a variety of sources. They might participate in ancillary services, arbitrage, and capacity auctions. For instance, many BESS installations in the United Kingdom currently revolve around ancillary services such as frequency control. Italy has BESS players that have broken through by winning one of the country’s renewables-focused capacity auctions. The opportunities in Germany revolve more around avoiding costly grid upgrades. The BESS players that have gotten traction in the FTM utility segment have understood the value of responding individually to countries and their regulations versus using one monolithic strategy.

Where is the value in the commercial and industrial segment?

Commercial and industrial (C&I) is the second-largest segment, and the 13 percent CAGR we forecast for it should allow C&I to reach between 52 and 70 GWh in annual additions by 2030.

C&I has four subsegments. The first is electric vehicle charging infrastructure (EVCI). EVs will jump from about 23 percent of all global vehicle sales in 2025 to 45 percent in 2030, according to the McKinsey Center for Future Mobility. This growth will require rapid expansion of regular charging stations and super chargers, putting pressure on the current grid infrastructure and necessitating costly, time-consuming upgrades. To avoid this, charging station companies and owners may opt to put a BESS on their properties. Partnerships have already formed between BESS players and EV producers to build more EVCI, including in remote locations.

The next subsegment of C&I is critical infrastructure such as telecommunication towers, data centers, and hospitals. In this subsegment, lead-acid batteries usually provide temporary backup through an uninterruptible power supply during outages until power resumes or diesel generators are turned on. In addition to replacing lead-acid batteries, lithium-ion BESS products can also be used to reduce reliance on less environmentally friendly diesel generators and can be integrated with renewable sources such as rooftop solar. In certain cases, excess energy stored on a battery may allow organizations to generate revenues through grid services. Several telecommunication players and data center owners are already switching to BESS as their uninterruptible power supply solution and for the additional benefits BESS provides.

The third subsegment is public infrastructure, commercial buildings, and factories. This subsegment will mostly use energy storage systems to help with peak shaving, integration with on-site renewables, self-consumption optimization, backup applications, and the provision of grid services. We believe BESS has the potential to reduce energy costs in these areas by up to 80 percent. The argument for BESS is especially strong in places such as Germany, North America, and the United Kingdom, where demand charges are often applied.

The final C&I subsegment consists of harsh environments—applications for mining, construction, oil and gas exploration, and events such as outdoor festivals. The source of the growth will be customers moving away from diesel or gas generators in favor of low-emission solutions such as BESS and hybrid generators. A main factor driving adoption in this segment is upcoming regulations (including the European Commission’s sustainability-focused Big Buyers initiative and Oslo’s plan for net zero on construction sites by 2025). Many of the companies that make the switch will start by converting to hybrid genset solutions rather than immediately moving completely to BESS.

What about the BESS residential consumer play?

Residential installations—headed for about 20 GWh in 2030—represent the smallest BESS segment. But residential is an attractive segment given the opportunity for innovation and differentiation in areas ranging from traditional home storage to the creation of microgrids in remote communities. From a sales perspective, BESS can be bundled with photovoltaic panels or integrated into smart homes or home EV charging systems. Tailored products will help residential customers achieve goals such as self-sufficiency, optimized self-consumption, and lower peak power consumption—and they may mean higher margins in this sector. Our recent consumer survey on alternative energy purchases suggests that interest in a BESS product will come down to a few factors, starting with price, safety, and ease of installation (Exhibit 3).

How might we think about our strategic positioning?

In a new market like this, it’s important to have a sense of the potential revenues and margins associated with the different products and services. The BESS value chain starts with manufacturers of storage components, including battery cells and packs, and of the inverters, housing, and other essential components in the balance of system. By our estimate, the providers in this part of the chain will receive roughly half of the BESS market profit pool.

Then there are the system integration activities, including the overall design and development of energy management systems and other software to make BESS more flexible and useful. We expect these integrators to get another 25 to 30 percent of the available profit pool.

Finally, between 10 and 20 percent of the profit pool is associated with sales entities, project development organizations, other customer acquisition activities, and commissioning (Exhibit 4).

What’s going on in the area of battery technology that we need to know about?

From a technology perspective, the main battery metrics that customers care about are cycle life and affordability. Lithium-ion batteries are currently dominant because they meet customers’ needs. Nickel manganese cobalt cathode used to be the primary battery chemistry, but lithium iron phosphate (LFP) has overtaken it as a cheaper option. (Lithium iron phosphate customers appear willing to accept the fact that LFP isn’t as strong as a nickel battery in certain areas, such as energy density.) However, lithium is scarce, which has opened the door to a number of other interesting and promising battery technologies, especially cell-based options such as sodium-ion (Na-ion), sodium-sulfur (Na-S), metal-air, and flow batteries.

Sodium-ion is one technology to watch. To be sure, sodium-ion batteries are still behind lithium-ion batteries in some important respects. Sodium-ion batteries have lower cycle life (2,000–4,000 versus 4,000–8,000 for lithium) and lower energy density (120–160 watt-hours per kilogram versus 170–190 watt-hours per kilogram for LFP). However, sodium-ion has the potential to be less costly—up to 20 percent cheaper than LFP, according to our analysis—and the technology continues to improve, especially as manufacturing reaches scale. Another advantage is safety: sodium batteries are less prone to thermal runaway. There’s also a sustainability case for sodium-ion batteries, because the environmental impact of mining lithium is high.

All of this makes it likely that sodium-ion batteries will capture an increasing share of the BESS market. Indeed, at least 6 manufacturers are expected to launch production of sodium-ion batteries in 2023. Clearly, providers will have to make decisions about which technology to bet on. Integrators may want to set up their systems so that their transition to sodium-ion batteries is straightforward as the batteries become widely available.

Is there a recipe for success in the BESS market? If so, what is it?

This is a critical question given the many customer segments that are available, the different business models that exist, and the impending technology shifts. Here are four actions that may contribute to success in the market:

Identify an underserved need in the value chain. In a nascent industry such as this, it pays for companies to think about other products and services that they could get into, whether through organic moves or inorganic ones. For instance, is there anything to stop a system integrator from doing battery packaging in-house? Or from codeveloping a new cell chemistry with a battery manufacturer? For that matter, is there anything to keep a battery manufacturer from adding system-integration or service capabilities to appeal to a specific BESS segment, such as utilities?

Software is a particularly critical area to explore. The value of storage systems will likely evolve from just hardware into the software that controls and enhances the system, unlocking the opportunity to capture larger customer segments and higher margins. BESS players need to develop these capabilities early.

Build resilience in supply chains. Many critical BESS components (ranging from battery cells to semiconductors in inverters and control systems) rely on complex supply chains, which are susceptible to supply shocks from a multitude of sources, including raw material shortages and regulation changes. Strategic partnerships, multi-sourcing, and local sourcing are all levers to consider when defining a supply chain strategy, while not forgetting to plan for potential technology shifts. In addition to BESS components, another bottleneck for those in the market is engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) capability and capacity, particularly for front-of-the-meter applications. Strategic partnerships with large EPC players ready for large-scale BESS installations are crucial to ensure successful execution of BESS projects.

Focus on the product features that matter most. Product specifications should reflect what customers care about. Having a customer segment strategy that informs the road map will increase the odds that every feature matters to customers. Such an approach is especially important given that price competition is likely to remain a permanent reality in the BESS market. The right product road map will also increase the odds of having a unique selling proposition in any segment a company happens to be in. For example, making the right decision on system architecture and integrating with existing customer infrastructure (say, by coupling direct current with photovoltaic technology) could reduce the barriers to entry for many customers.

Think big and move fast. With BESS in the spotlight and revenues starting to increase rapidly, now is not a time to play it safe. While it’s true that the market is highly fragmented, it’s also true that some bigger players are starting to amass market share. This raises the stakes for all companies, especially for small ones that may have started a decade ago as research projects and now find themselves sitting on top of valuable intellectual property. These companies will likely need to take some risks to have a chance of gaining share and avoid being muscled out by bigger companies.

The BESS market is in an explosive stage of development; players that don’t move now will miss out. The winners in the market will be the companies that exhibit the four things required for success. These winners will create value in a new market as the energy transition accelerates.

Gabriella Jarbratt is an engagement manager in McKinsey’s Stockholm office, where Erik Sparre is a partner. Sören Jautelat is a partner in the Stuttgart office, where Alexandre van de Rijt is an associate partner. Martin Linder is a senior partner in the Munich office. Quan Han Wong is a senior associate in McKinsey’s London office.

The authors wish to thank Yujin An, Nicolò Campagnol, Jan Chhatwal, Jonathan Deffarges, Jose Luis Gonzales, Yves Gulda, Zarief Hasrat, Evan Horetsky, Emil Hosius, Luca Rigovacca, Giulia Siccardo, Christian Staudt, Godart van Gendt, and the McKinsey Energy Storage Insights team for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Battery 2030: Resilient, sustainable, and circular

The energy transition: A region-by-region agenda for near-term action

Library » Publication

Case studies of renewable thermal energy, a report to the renewable thermal collaborative by the center for climate and energy solutions.

This series of case studies showcases successful outcomes from the use of renewable thermal technologies at several different large companies and in a major city. It also provides some understanding of the potential benefits and challenges when considering different renewable heating and cooling technologies. In each of the case studies, significant cost and emissions savings were generated by investments in renewable thermal solutions.

One key theme across all of the case studies was that each organization had clearly established sustainability goals that supported a renewable approach. Other factors that facilitated implementation of renewable thermal solutions included high and volatile fossil fuel costs or the phaseout of older capital investments, which offered an opportunity to review renewable options for heating and cooling needs.

Another common theme shared by each of the case studies was the availability of a local resource. This makes the projects more difficult to replicate since local circumstances can greatly vary the project economics or viability of a certain technology for a given application. However, facilities co-located with each other may offer expanded possibilities for renewable thermal solutions.

Most projects included in this report were self-financed and achieved their expected return on investment. However, one technology facing more economic barriers is renewable natural gas (RNG). RNG projects in the United States have been stalled due to low domestic natural gas prices. In the RNG case study included in this report, the market for the renewable fuel standard program was used to mitigate this cost barrier, but broader federal programs may be needed to help support RNG over the long term. The introduction of a thermal renewable energy certificate could also make tracking and claims easier and more standardized for these types of projects.

The Renewable Thermal Collaborative (RTC) is facilitated by the  Center for Climate and Energy Solutions ,  David Gardiner and Associates , and  World Wildlife Fund . The goal of the RTC is to raise awareness and build greater supply and demand for renewable thermal options. Increasing the availability and cost competitiveness of these solutions is key to deploying them at scale. With greater scale, more organizations in the industrial and commercial sectors will be able to make dramatic cuts in their carbon emissions.

Download Publication (pdf, 3 MB)

In a warming world, the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy is heating up. Global capacity for renewable power generation is expanding more quickly than at any time in the last thirty years, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). The agency predicts that by 2025, renewable energy will surpass coal to become the world’s top source of electricity. Wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) power generation are forecast to exceed nuclear power generation in 2025 and 2026, respectively. And by 2028, 68 countries will boast renewables as their main source of power.

The acceleration in clean, renewable energy power generation comes not a moment too soon for policymakers and advocates concerned with climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions .

Policies driving development

At 2023’s United Nation’s Climate Change Conference (COP28), governments set a goal to triple global renewables power capacity by 2030. This will ideally help advance decarbonization , mitigate climate change and achieve net-zero emissions, according to the IEA .

To develop renewable energy technology, governments are turning to various public policy measures. The European Union’s Green Deal Industrial Plan, India’s Production Linked Incentives (PLI) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in the US are all policies designed to further stimulate the integration of sustainable energy. Supportive economic policies in China have accelerated onshore wind and solar photovoltaic energy projects there, helping the country surpass national 2030 targets years ahead of schedule. (This is crucial to the goal of tripling worldwide renewables as China accounts for almost 60% of all new global renewable energy capacity expected to come online by 2028 .) In addition, evolving regulations on corporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiatives around the world are increasing demand for renewable energy in the private sector, encouraging further growth.

Renewable energy growth by type

Broad policy measures notwithstanding, policy support often varies depending on the type of renewable energy in question. Let’s take a closer look at several types of renewable energy resources and the trends taking shape in each category.

Solar power

In 2023, solar photovoltaic energy made up three-quarters of renewable capacity additions around the world, according to the IEA. Capacity growth stemmed from both utility-scale plants and consumer adoption of distributed PV systems—on-site solar power generation at homes and businesses— accounted for the other half .

Continued policy support from governments around the world remains the primary driver of this growth. For example, some policymakers incentivize renewable power generation by individuals and businesses through net-metering programs that allow utility customers to send excess energy generated back to their utilities for credits. Other incentives encouraging the production and use of solar power include feed-in-tariffs , tax credits and auctions in which solar power providers compete on energy market price to win contracts.

The expansion of the solar PV supply chain is enabling the manufacturing necessary to meet the demands of the growing industry. More manufacturing capacity in the US, India and the EU is expected to help diversify the solar PV supply chain, but China continues to dominate the space. (The country was home to 95% of new solar technology manufacturing facilities in 2022 .) And advancements in solar photovoltaic technology are producing lighter, less expensive, more efficient solar panels that will continue to increase generation capacity over time.

Based on the IEA’s Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (NZE), if current growth rates are maintained through 2030, solar PV is “on track” to meet annual generation capacity of approximately 8,300 terawatt hours (TWh) by the end of the decade . In addition, solar PV is expected to be the dominant source of energy in the production of low-emissions or green hydrogen. Low-emissions hydrogen (in contrast to hydrogen produced with fossil fuel power) can potentially drive greater decarbonization efforts in businesses ranging from steelmaking to ammonia production, where hydrogen is used for industrial purposes.

As with solar power, public policies have been key to driving wind energy expansion, but growth projections vary by region. China saw a 66% increase in wind power capacity in 2023 and is on track for more additions in the coming years. Project development, however, has been slower than initially expected in Europe and North America. Offshore wind projects have been especially vulnerable: In 2023, in the US and UK alone, developers canceled offshore projects with total capacity of 15 gigawatts (GW).

Recent public policies may help support the industry during this challenging period. In 2023, the European Union announced its Wind Power Action Plan, with measures to improve permitting, auction processes and financing access as well as expand workforce training . In the same year, nine European countries announced plans to increase offshore wind power capacity to over 120 GW by 2030 and over 300 GW by 2050 . Meanwhile, in the US, the government is investing in the development of floating wind farms. The deployment of floating wind farms with a capacity of 15 GW is expected by 2035 .

For wind power to meet the goals of the IEA’s NZE, average annual growth would need to reach or surpass 17% per year until 2030 .

Currently, hydropower generates more power—reaching 4,300 TWh in 2022— than all other clean energy sources combined and will remain the largest source through 2030, according to the IEA. Despite small but steady growth and proven reliability, new hydropower additions are forecast to decrease 23% over the next decade due to development slowdowns in Europe, China and Latin America.

Over the past 20 years, energy industry focus has shifted from hydropower, with most countries focusing policies and incentives on expanding solar and wind power. Today, less than 30 countries offer policies to support new hydropower development and refurbishment of existing plants versus over 100 countries with policies to support wind and solar PV.

To meet the NZE Scenario, hydropower would need to grow at an annual rate of at least 4% .

Global biofuel expansion is underway, thanks largely to supportive government policies in emerging economies such as Brazil, India and Indonesia. Demand is largely driven by the transportation sector in those countries, while supply is enabled by the availability of biomass feedstock. Brazil leads the way in biofuel expansion, accounting for a projected 40% of growth by 2028 .

Biofuel expansion is more limited in the EU, US, Canada and Japan due in part to high costs and the growing popularity of electric vehicles. The main areas of growth for biofuels in these countries are the renewable diesel and biojet fuel segments. Overall, biofuels such as bioethanol and biodiesel, in combination with electric vehicles (EVs), have the potential to offset the oil equivalent of four million barrels by 2028. Such milestones notwithstanding, the IEA predicts that biofuel expansion will still fall short of 2030 NZE goals.

Biogas: While the growth of the biogas industry began in the 1990s, the last two years have seen an increase in policy support for the natural gas alternative. Currently, almost half of all global biogas production comes from Europe, with 20% of that from Germany alone .

Historically, biogas has been used at heat and power plants. More recently, however, governments have encouraged industrial and transportation uses for biomethane, a biogas which, as its name suggests, contains a substantial concentration of methane. With 13 countries implementing strong new policies supporting biogas since 2022, the IEA projects that biogas production growth will accelerate through 2028.

Geothermal energy

Technological developments are creating opportunities to bring geothermal energy to more places. For example, through Enhanced Geothermal Energy Systems, fluid is injected underground in areas without naturally occurring hot water sources. The fluid heats up underground and then is pumped to the surface, where it generates electricity . Various geothermal projects are planned or underway around the word, including in North America, Europe and Asia.

Such advancements notwithstanding, advocates for geothermal energy say policies are needed to take advantage of its untapped potential. The capital-intensive nature and financing costs of geothermal projects can be prohibitive. The evolution of economies of scale and continued technological advancements could help drive down costs, but for now, the IEA forecasts that only about 1% of renewable energy will be sourced from geothermal energy production by 2030. 23

Technology to support evolving renewable energy

As more renewable energy is added to energy systems, technology will play a crucial role in keeping the energy supply flowing while ensuring energy security and the stability of power grids.

Because renewable energy sources, especially wind and solar, are vulnerable to environmental conditions, ensuring optimal production and distribution is crucial to providing a stable, resilient power supply. Renewables forecasting is rapidly becoming an important tool in the energy transition. For example, solutions such as the IBM Renewables Forecasting Platform within the IBM Environmental Intelligence Suite can provide day-ahead wind and solar forecasts with 92% accuracy .

Better storage will also help make power systems more resilient. Solar, wind and hydropower all require energy storage systems (ESS) to provide a consistent energy supply. As grid-scale battery technology evolves, utility companies will be able to store electricity long-term to better manage load during periods of low- or non-production. For instance, flow batteries are a low-cost and scalable form of long-term grid-scale energy storage currently being developed.

From batteries to solar arrays, effective asset management is an important component in supporting a clean energy transition; intelligent asset management and predictive maintenance can monitor asset health and prolong its lifespan. For instance, the New York Power Authority (NYPA) is streamlining its asset management with the IBM Maximo® Application Suite . The goal is to digitalize the state’s energy infrastructure and transform it into a clean, reliable, resilient and affordable system over the next decade.

Expand your sustainability journey and make the most of your energy investments by connecting your strategic roadmap with day-to-day operations.

Explore the IBM Environmental Intelligence Suite for Energy and Utilities and see the IBM Maximo Application Suite for Energy and Utilities .

More from Sustainability

Unlock the power of systems modeling with ibm engineering systems design rhapsody 10.0 .

3 min read - Software and product development teams need to overcome many challenges to deliver high-quality, price-competitive offerings that meet compliance and regulatory standards. Traceability, scalability, complexity management, collaboration, tool integration and interoperability cause engineering projects to suffer from inefficiencies, such as project delays, siloed processes and unconnected tools, which hinder progress and productivity.   In today's competitive landscape, a powerful model-driven software engineering tool is no longer a luxury; it's a strategic necessity that enables informed decision-making, operational optimization and innovation.   Today we…

Renewable energy in action: Examples and use cases for fueling the future

5 min read - As more countries, companies and individuals seek energy sources beyond fossil fuels, interest in renewable energy continues to rise. In fact, world-wide capacity for energy from solar, wind and other renewable sources increased by 50% in 2023. More than 110 countries at the United Nations’ COP28 climate change conference agreed to triple that capacity by 2030, and global investment in clean energy transition hit a record high of USD 1.8 trillion in 2023. But with all of this new capacity,…

4 smart technologies modernizing sourcing strategy

3 min read - Sourcing is getting smarter. To start, many organizations have already pivoted from a tactical to a strategic sourcing mindset—which can make all the difference when it comes to gaining and retaining a competitive advantage. Why? Because organizations with strategic sourcing mindsets look beyond price and cost savings-centered supplier selection initiatives. They instead focus on continuous improvement. They consider factors—like supplier performance or sustainability—that support long-term partnerships, advance business needs and increase purchasing power. Successful strategic sourcing often results in process…

IBM Newsletters

Renewable Energy Technology and Systems Integration for the Oil and Gas Industry

• Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis

Research output : NREL › Presentation

Publication series

Nrel publication number.

• NREL/PR-6A50-76510
• oil and gas
• renewable energy

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

• https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/76510.pdf

Fingerprint

• Integrated System Engineering 100%
• Renewable Energy Technologies Engineering 100%
• Petroleum Industry Engineering 100%
• Renewable Energy System Engineering 100%
• Gas Material Science 100%
• Energy Engineering Engineering 66%
• Joints (Structural Components) Engineering 66%
• Specific Case Engineering 33%

T1 - Renewable Energy Technology and Systems Integration for the Oil and Gas Industry

AU - Engel-Cox, Jill

N2 - Introduction to the mission and research of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis (JISEA). JISEA is co-sponsored by industries, governments, and partnered with several academic institutions (see https://www.jisea.org). Presentation will review statistics about the growth of renewable energy and also discuss potential future trends. It will review several specific case studies relevant to the oil and gas industry, including renewable energy for industrial operations and clean technologies and fuels that would be most relevant to oil and gas technologies and capabilities.

AB - Introduction to the mission and research of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis (JISEA). JISEA is co-sponsored by industries, governments, and partnered with several academic institutions (see https://www.jisea.org). Presentation will review statistics about the growth of renewable energy and also discuss potential future trends. It will review several specific case studies relevant to the oil and gas industry, including renewable energy for industrial operations and clean technologies and fuels that would be most relevant to oil and gas technologies and capabilities.

KW - oil and gas

KW - renewable energy

M3 - Presentation

T3 - Presented at the Chevron Flexibility Mechanisms Evaluation Network Webinar, 7 April 2020

Towards Sustainable Energy: A Systematic Review of Renewable Energy Sources, Technologies, and Public Opinions

Ieee account.

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Published: 12 June 2020

The justice and equity implications of the clean energy transition

• Sanya Carley   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9599-4519 1 &
• David M. Konisky   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1146-3938 1  

Nature Energy volume  5 ,  pages 569–577 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

25k Accesses

451 Citations

147 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Energy and society
• Energy justice
• Energy policy
• Social sciences

The transition to lower-carbon sources of energy will inevitably produce and, in many cases, perpetuate pre-existing sets of winners and losers. The winners are those that will benefit from cleaner sources of energy, reduced emissions from the removal of fossil fuels, and the employment and innovation opportunities that accompany this transition. The losers are those that will bear the burdens, or lack access to the opportunities. Here we review the current state of understanding—based on a rapidly growing body of academic and policy literature—about the potential adverse consequences of the energy transition for specific communities and socio-economic groups on the frontlines of the transition. We review evidence about just transition policies and programmes, primarily from cases in the Global North, and draw conclusions about what insights are still needed to understand the justice and equity dimensions of the transition, and to ensure that no one is left behind.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

111,21 € per year

only 9,27 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).

Newell, R. G. & Raimi, D. The New Climate Math: Energy Addition, Subtraction, and Transition . Issue Brief 18–09 (Resources for the Future, 2018).

Fouquet, R. Historical energy transitions: speed, prices and system transformation. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 22 , 7–12 (2016).

Google Scholar  

Sovacool, B. K. How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13 , 202–215 (2016). Reviews the academic literature on the time scale of the current energy transition .

Smil, V. Examining energy transitions: A dozen insights based on performance. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 22 , 194–197 (2016).

Allen, R. C. Backward into the future: The shift to coal and implications for the next energy transition. Energy Policy 50 , 17–23 (2012).

Mackard, J. The next phase of the energy transition and its implications for research and policy. Nat. Energy 3 , 628–633 (2018).

Jenkins, K. Setting energy justice apart from the crowd: Lessons from environmental and climate justice. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 39 , 117–21 (2018).

Fuller, S. & McCauley, D. Framing energy justice: Perspectives from activism and advocacy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11 , 1–8 (2016).

Bazilian, M., Nakhooda, S. & Van de Graaf, T. Energy governance and poverty. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1 , 217–25 (2014).

Middlemiss, L. & Gillard, R. Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterizing household energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel poor. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 6 , 146–54 (2015).

Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H. & Rehner, R. Energy Justice: A Conceptual Review. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11 , 174–82 (2016).

McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H. & Jenkins, K. Advancing energy justice: The triumvirate of tenets. Int. Energy Law Rev. 32 , 107–110 (2013). Provides a conceptual framework for energy justice and defines the three tenets of the concept .

Sovacool, B. K. & Dworkin, M. H. Energy justice: Conceptual insights and practical applications. Appl. Energy 142 , 435–444 (2015).

Jones, B. R., Sovacool, B. K. & Sidortsov, R. V. Making the ethical and philosophical case for “energy justice”. Environ. Ethics 37 , 145–68 (2015).

Heffron, R. J. & McCauley, D. The concept of energy justice across the disciplines. Energy Policy 105 , 658–667 (2017).

Sovacool, B. K., Heffron, R. J., McCauley, D. & Goldthau, A. Energy decisions reframed as justice and ethical concerns. Nat. Energy 1 , 1–6 (2016).

Sovacool, B. K., Burke, M., Baker, L., Kotikalapudi, C. & Wlokas, H. New frontiers and conceptual frameworks for energy justice. Energy Policy 105 , 677–691 (2017).

Healy, N. & Barry, J. Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition”. Energy Policy 108 , 451–459 (2017).

Oppenheim, J. The United States regulatory compact and energy poverty. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 18 , 96–108 (2016). Evaluates the origins and intentions of utility regulation, and then proposes measures that could improve the degree to which such regulations advance social justice.

Banzhaf, S., Ma, L. & Timmins, C. Environmental justice: The economics of race, place, and pollution. J. Econ. Perspect. 33 , 185–208 (2019).

Welton, S., Eisen, J. Clean energy justice: Charting an emerging agenda. Harvard Environmental Law Revie w (2019). This law article provides a comprehensive discussion of the energy justice dimensions of clean energy developments.

Mills, S., Bessette, D. & Smith, H. Exploring landowners’ post-construction changes in perceptions of wind energy in Michigan. Land Use Policy 82 , 754–762 (2019).

Outka, U. Environmental justice issues in sustainable development: Environmental justice in the renewable energy transition. J. Environ. Sustain. Law 19 , 60–122 (2012).

Jolley, G. J., Khalaf, C., Michaud, G. & Sandler, A. M. The economic, fiscal, and workforce impacts of coal-fired power plant closures in Appalachian Ohio. Reg. Sci. Policy Pract. 11 , 403–422 (2019).

Pai, S., Zerriffi, H., Jewell, J. & Pathak, J. Solar has greater techno-economic resource suitability than wind for replacing coal mining jobs. Environ. Res. Lett . 10.1088/1748–9326/ab6c6d (2020).

Carley, S., Evans, T. P. & Konisky, D. M. Adaptation, culture, and the energy transition in American coal country. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 37 , 133–139 (2018). This article assesses how the energy transition is affecting American coal country .

Cameron, L. & van der Zwaan, B. Employment factors for wind and solar energy technologies: A literature review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45 , 160–172 (2015).

Clean Jobs America (E2, 2019); https://www.e2.org/reports/clean-jobs-america-2019/

Outlook handbook: fastest growing occupations. US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/ooh/fastest-growing.htm (2019).

Pollin, R. & Callaci, B. The economics of just transition: A framework for supporting fossil fuel-dependent workers and communities in the United States. Labor Stud. J. 44 , 93–138 (2019).

Lobao, M., Zhou, M., Partridge, M. & Betz, M. Poverty, place, and coal employment across Appalachia and the United States in a new economic era. Rural Sociol. 81 , 343–386 (2016).

Tierney, S. The U.S. Coal Industry: Challenging Transitions in the 21st Century (Analysis Group, 2016)

Della Bosca, H. & Gillespie, J. The coal story: Generational coal mining communities and strategies of energy transition in Australia. Energy Policy 120 , 734–740 (2018).

Burke, P. J., Best, R. & Jotzo, F. Closures of coal-fired power stations in Australia: local unemployment effects. Agric. Resour. Econ. 63 , 142–165 (2019).

Haggerty, J. H., Haggerty, M. N., Roemer, K. & Rose, J. Planning for the local impacts of coal facility closure: Emerging strategies in the U. S. West. Resour. Policy 57 , 69–80 (2018).

Morris, A., Kaufman, N. & Doshi, S. The risk of fiscal collapse in coal reliant communities. The Brookings Institution https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-risk-of-fiscal-collapse-in-coal-reliant-communities (2019).

Olson-Hazboun, S. K. “Why are we being punished and they are being rewarded?” views on renewable energy in fossil fuels-based communities of the U. S. west. Extr. Ind. Soc. 5 , 366–374 (2018).

Drehobl, A. & Ross, L. Lifting the high energy burden in America’s largest cities: How energy efficiency can improve low income and underserved communities (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 2016); https://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/u1602.pdf Detailed analysis of energy insecurity in American cities .

Ross, L., Drehobl, A. & Stickles, B. The High Cost of Energy in Rural America: Household Energy Burdens and Opportunities for Energy Efficiency (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 2018); https://aceee.org/research-report/u1806 . Detailed analysis of energy insecurity in rural America .

One in three U. S. households face challenges in paying energy bills in 2015. Residential Energy Consumption Survey. U.S. Energy Information Administration https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/reports/2015/energybills (2015).

O’Sullivan, K., Barnard, L. T., Viggers, H. & Howden-Chapman, P. Child and youth fuel poverty: Assessing the known and unknown. People Place Policy 10 , 77–87 (2016).

Papada, L. & Kaliampakos, D. Measuring energy poverty in Greece. Energy Policy 94 , 157–165 (2016).

Hernández, D. Sacrifice along the energy continuum: a call for energy justice. Environ. Justice 8 (4), 151–156 (2015). This article evaluates how vulnerable communities bear disproportionate burdens along the spectrum that includes both energy production and consumption .

Hernández, D. & Siegel, E. Energy insecurity and its ill health effects: A community perspective in New York City. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 47 , 78–83 (2019).

Reames, T. G. Targeting energy justice: Exploring spatial, racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban residential heating energy efficiency. Energy Policy 97 , 549–558 (2016). Maps rates of fuel poverty along racial/ethnic and socioeconomic block group characteristics, and finds that lower-income and racial- and ethnic-headed households, respectively, have higher rates of fuel poverty .

Hernández, D. & Phillips, D. Benefit or burden? Perceptions of energy efficiency efforts among low-income housing residents in New York City. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 8 , 52–59 (2015).

Graff, M., Carley, S. & Konisky, D. Stakeholder perceptions of the United States energy transition: Local-level dynamics and community responses to national politics and policy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 43 , 144–157 (2018).

Carley, S., Evans, T. P., Graff, M. & Konisky, D. M. A framework for evaluating geographic disparities in energy transition vulnerability. Nat. Energy 3 , 621–627 (2018).

Hernández, D. & Bird, S. Energy burden and the need for integrated low-income housing and energy policy. Poverty Public Policy 2 , 5–25 (2010).

Bickerstaff, K., Walker, G. & Bulkeley, H. (eds.) Energy Justice in a Changing Climate (Zed Books,).

Byrne, J. & Portanger, C. Climate change, energy policy and justice: A systematic review. Anal. Krit. 2 , 315–343 (2014).

Moore, T., Ridley, I., Strengers, Y., Maller, C. & Horne, R. Dwelling performance and adaptive summer comfort in low-income Australian households. Build. Res. Inf. 45 , 443–456 (2017).

Passey, R., Watt, M., Bruce, A. & MacGill, I. Who pays, who benefits? The financial impacts of solar photovoltaic systems and air-conditioners on Australian households. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 39 , 198–215 (2018).

Lehr, U., Lutz, C. & Edler, D. Green jobs? Economic impacts of renewable energy in Germany. Energy Policy 47 , 358–364 (2012).

Wei, M., Patadia, S. & Kammen, D. M. Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: How many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the US? Energy Policy 38 , 919–931 (2010).

Renewable energy and jobs – Annual Review 2018 (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2018).

Occupational Outlook Handbook. Fastest Growing Occupations. US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/ooh/fastest-growing.htm (2019).

National Solar Jobs Census 2018 (Solar Foundation, 2018).

PESA Diversity Study Identifies Opportunities to Advance Women in the Workplace. Petroleum Equipment & Services Association https://pesa.org/archives/pesa-diversity-study-identifies-opportunities-to-advance-women-in-the-workplace (2018).

U.S. Energy and Employment Report (US Department of Energy, 2017).

Gender and Energy (European Institute for Gender Equality, 2017); https://eige.europa.eu/publications/gender-and-energy

Pearl-Martinez, R. & Stephens, J. C. Toward a gender diverse workforce in the renewable energy transition. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 12 , 8–15 (2016).

Walker, C. & Baxter, J. Procedural justice in Canadian wind energy development: A comparison of community-based and technocratic siting processes. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 29 , 160–169 (2017).

Zarate-Toledo, E., Patino, R. & Fraga, J. Justice, social inclusion and indigenous opposition: A case study of wind energy development on the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Mexico. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 54 , 1–11 (2019).

Baker, S. H. Mexican energy reform, climate change, and energy justice in indigenous communities. Nat. Resour. J. 56 , 369–390 (2016).

Daley, D. M. & Reames, T. G. in Failed Promises: Evaluating the Federal Government's Response to Environmental Justice Ch. 6 (MIT Press, 2015).

Borenstein, S. & Davis, L. W. The distributional effects of U. S. clean energy tax credits. Tax. Policy Econ. 30 , 191–234 (2016).

Mullen, C. & Marsden, G. Mobility justice in low carbon energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 18 , 109–117 (2016).

Mitra, S. & Buluswar, S. Universal access to electricity: Closing the affordability gap. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 40 , 261–283 (2015).

Sunter, D., Castellanos, S. & Kammen, D. M. Disparities in rooftop photovoltaics deployment in the United States by race and ethnicity. Nat. Sustain. 2 , 71–76 (2019). Study evaluates the racial and ethnic disparities in rooftop solar development .

Chan, G., Evans, I., Grimley, M., Ihde, B. & Mazumder, P. Design choices and equity implications of community shared solar. Electr. J. 30 , 37–41 (2017).

Balta-Ozkan, N., Davidson, R., Bicket, M. & Whitmarsh, L. Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes. Energy Policy 63 , 363–374 (2013).

Wada, K., Akimoto, K., Sano, F., Oda, J. & Homma, T. Energy efficiency opportunities in the residential sector and their feasibility. Energy 48 , 5–10 (2012).

Reames, T. G., Reiner, M. A. & Stacey, M. B. An incandescent truth: Disparities in energy-efficient lighting availability and prices in an urban U. S. county. Appl. Energy 218 , 95–103 (2018). Studies distributional disparities in access to and price of energy efficient light bulbs .

Bednar, D. J. & Reames, T. G. Recognition of and response to energy poverty in the United States. Nat. Energy . 10.1038/s41560-020-0582–0 (2020).

Carley, S., Engle, C., Konisky, D. & Sullivan, S. Supporting vulnerable communities in a Green New Deal. Public Administration Review https://www.publicadministrationreview.com/2019/07/16/gnd17 (2020).

Zinecker, A. et al. Real People, Real Change: Strategies for Just Energy Transition s (IISD, 2017); https://iisd.org/library/real-people-real-change-strategies-just-energy-transitions

Harrahill, K. & Douglas, O. Framework development for ‘just transition’ in coal producing jurisdictions. Energy Policy 134 , 1–11 (2019).

Franklin, M., Kurtz, C. Lights outs in the cold: Reforming utility shut-off policies as if human rights matter. (NAACP, 2017).

Cook, J. K. & Bird, L. Unlocking Solar For Low- And Moderate-Income Residents: A Matrix of Financing Options By Resident, Provider, And Housing Type Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-70477 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2018).

Bomberg, E. & McEwen, N. Mobilizing community energy. Energy Policy 51 , 435–444 (2012).

Jenkins, K., McCauley, D. & Forman, A. Energy justice: A policy approach. Energy Policy 105 , 631–34 (2017).

Reames, T. G. A community-based approach to low-income residential energy efficiency participation barriers. Local Environ. 21 , 1449–1466 (2016).

Tonn, B. et al. Weatherization Works – Summary of Findings from The Retrospective Evaluation of The U. S. Department of Energy’s Weatherization Assistance Program Report ORNL/TM-2014/338 (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2014).

Tonn, B., Rose, E. & Hawkins, B. Evaluation of the U. S. department of energy’s weatherization assistance program: Impact results. Energy Policy 118 , 279–290 (2018).

Graff, M. & Pirog, M. Red tape is not so hot: Asset tests impact participation in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Energy Policy 129 , 749–764 (2019). Evaluates how the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program’s asset test is regressive.

Murray, A. G. & Mills, B. F. The impact of low-income home energy assistance program participation on household energy insecurity. Contemp. Econ. Policy 32 , 811–825 (2014).

Chapman, R., Howden-Chapman, P., Viggers, H., O’Dea, D. & Kennedy, M. Retrofitting houses with insulation: a cost-benefit analysis of a randomized community trial. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 63 , 271–277 (2009).

Howden-Chapman, P. & Chapman, R. Health co-benefits from housing-related policies. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 4 , 414–419 (2012).

Perl, L. LIHEAP: Program and funding Report PL31865 (Congressional Research Service, 2018); https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31865.pdf

Lamb, A. K. Energy Efficiency and Health: A Guide for Public Health and Health Care Professionals (Public Health Institute, 2019); http://www.phi.org/resources/?resource=energy-efficiency-and-health-a-guide-for-public-health-and-health-care-professionals

Nowak, S., Kushler, M. & Witte, P. The New Leaders of the Pack: Aceee’s Fourth National Review of Exemplary Energy Efficiency Programs (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 2019); https://www.aceee.org/research-report/u1901

Gilleo, A., Nowak, S. & Drehobl, A. Making a Difference: Strategies for Successful Low-Income Energy Efficiency Programs Report U1713 (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 2017); http://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/u1713.pdf

Sartor, O. Implementing Coal Transitions: Insights from Case Studies of Major Coal-Consuming Economies (IDDRI, Climate Strategies, 2018).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by the Environmental Resilience Institute, funded by Indiana University’s Prepared for Environmental Change Grand Challenge initiative.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Paul H. O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

Sanya Carley & David M. Konisky

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanya Carley .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Carley, S., Konisky, D.M. The justice and equity implications of the clean energy transition. Nat Energy 5 , 569–577 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0641-6

Download citation

Received : 27 November 2019

Accepted : 21 May 2020

Published : 12 June 2020

Issue Date : August 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0641-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Sustainable pathways towards universal renewable electricity access in africa.

• Rebecca Peters
• Jürgen Berlekamp
• Christiane Zarfl

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment (2024)

Supply, demand and polarization challenges facing US climate policies

• Matthew G. Burgess
• Leaf Van Boven
• Michael P. Vandenbergh

Nature Climate Change (2024)

Justice considerations in climate research

• Caroline Zimm
• Kian Mintz-Woo
• Thomas Schinko

Regulatory disparities disadvantage remote Australian communities in energy transition

• Lee V. White
• Bradley Riley
• Vanessa Napaltjari Davis

Nature Energy (2024)

Regional rare-earth element supply and demand balanced with circular economy strategies

• Yu-Yao Yang
• Wei-Qiang Chen

Nature Geoscience (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• ORIGINAL ARTICLE
• Open access
• Published: 06 March 2017

A case study of a procedure to optimize the renewable energy coverage in isolated systems: an astronomical center in the North of Chile

• H. Abos 2 ,
• M. Ave   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7386-4828 1 &
• H. Martínez-Ortiz 2  

Energy, Sustainability and Society volume  7 , Article number:  7 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

2 Citations

Metrics details

Renewable energy resources show variabilities at different characteristic time scales. For a given resource and demand pro le, there is an absolute maximum achievable coverage (when limiting the fraction of energy lost during production and delivery to a reasonable value). To reach larger coverage factors, two plausible paths can be taken: a mix of resources with different time variabilities and/or an energy storage system. The case treated in this paper is the electricity supply of an Astronomical Center in the North of Chile. The economical feasibility of both possibilities is explored and compared to a grid connected alternative.

First, data from local weather stations was collected to have a realistic evaluation of the variability of the solar/wind resource at all time scales. Then, we developed a scalable design of a solar/wind plant and a pumped hydro energy storage system. The free parameters of the design are the maximum installed power for each resource and the capacity of the storage system. Finally, the electricity production is calculated to determine the coverage factor and losses for different values of these parameters.

We found that a coverage factor of 64% is economically feasible for systems without storage. The associated total losses are 24%. To reach larger coverage factors is not economically possible and a storage system must be introduced. If this is done, there is a quantum increase of the total cost of about 30%. However, losses are reduced to about 5% and the coverage factor reaches almost 90%. The cost increase is marginally economically feasible, but it has some other advantages: the consumer is independent of the volatility of electricity prices, and is more sustainable.

The time variability of renewable energy resources difficults reaching coverage levels larger than 60%. Energy storage systems are a requirement. Periods of zero net production seem unavoidable unless the renewable energy and storage system are largely overdimensioned. Back up systems based on fossil fuels seem to be unavoidable. Both the energy storage and back up system add an extra cost that has to be paid if such high coverage levels are a requirement.

The case treated in this paper is the electricity supply of an Astronomical Center in the North of Chile. The ESO is the European Organization for Astronomical research in the Southern hemisphere. It operates the VLT (very large telescope), located at Cerro Paranal in the Atacama desert, North of Chile. The E-ELT (European extremely large optical/infrared telescope) in Cerro Armazones (20 km away from Cerro Paranal) is in advanced design phase and will be the largest optical telescope in the world. Finally, the CTA collaboration (Cherenkov Telescope Array) has chosen the Armazones-Paranal site for construction of its Southern Observatory.

When the two new observatories enter in operation, the peak power demand of the Armazones-Paranal site is estimated to be ∼ 8.5 MW and the total annual energy consumption ∼ 70 GWh. Currently, the VLT is generating its own electricity using fossil fuel-based generators.

The two main characteristics of this consumption center are the strong requirements on the stability of the electricity supply, and the relatively large power demanded. Due to these two factors, the use of liquid fossil fuels is economically un-viable. The only two non-renewable solutions plausible are connection to the Chilean national grid or self production of electricity using generators run with natural gas from a nearby pipeline.

The main renewable energy resources available at the site are wind and solar. In this work, we consider a wind-solar PV plant with Pumped Hydro Energy Storage (PHES). We calculate the coverage factor for different values of total Power, Maximum Energy Storage and wind to solar fraction to find energy systems that maximize coverage but with costs below the non-renewable energy solutions. Embedded in this procedure is the fact that renewable energy time variability can be diminished by considering a mixture. An important ingredient of this procedure is the relative cost of each technology. Government estimates are taken when possible.

Additionally, a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant with thermal energy storage is analyzed. This technology is considered separately since the storage system cannot be used by the wind farm.

The design of the systems is not detailed but all sources of inefficiencies are taken into account. The wind and solar input data used is from local weather stations, which provides realistic time series that account for all possible sources of the variability of the resources. Overall, the estimates of electricity production and cost are as realistic as possible so they can be used as a guide if such energy systems are eventually implemented. The total cost of each system includes operation and maintenance over the 25 year lifetime of the astronomical center.

The paper is organized as follows: in “ Energy demand ” section, the energy demand is described; in “ Non-renewable energy systems ” section, the non-renewable energy systems and their cost are analyzed; in “ Renewable energy resources available in the site: solar and wind ” section, the solar and wind data used in our calculations is described; in “ Renewable energy systems ” section, the methodology to calculate the time series of electricity production for the Wind-Solar PV plant with PHES is presented, together with a modular design of each of the subsystems and their cost; in “ Results ” section, an algorithm to find the optimum system is presented and compared to the non-renewable energy alternatives. The CSP with thermal storage design and cost are presented in the Appendix .

Energy demand

The energy demand of the VLT is known [ 1 ]. The power demand changes from day to night but is rather constant along the year (less than 5% variability). The projected E-ELT (CTA) consumption is taken from ESO estimates [ 2 ]. All the sub-systems, including lodging, offices and workshops are included. A simplified model is adopted: a constant power with different day/night values. The start/end for day/night will be calculated using the sunrise and sunset, even though the start/end of astronomical observations is typically later/earlier.

Table 1 shows a summary of the site energy demand. Night consumption is smaller than day for the E-ELT and VLT due to the strict thermal control system.

All observatories work in slow tracking mode during the night. In between observational windows, telescopes are re-positioned to track new objects. The instantaneous power required for re-positioning is large compared to the average power: 700, 3200, and 2000 kW for the VLT, CTA, and E-ELT compared to 1000, 2750, and 4250 kW. However, the total energy for repositioning is small (<5%). The extra power for repositioning can be supplied by energy storage systems with extremely fast responses like flywheels, STATCOMs or a battery system.

Non-renewable energy systems

Connection to the chilean electrical network.

The grid connection alternative envisages the connection of the Armazones-Paranal site to the Paposo substation. It requires the construction of a ∼ 60 km 66 kV line, one 220–66 kV transformer (at Paposo) and one 66–23 kV substation (located halfway between Cerro Armazones and Paranal). The projected investment cost or CAPEX is 12.5 MUSD ( ∼ 11 M e ). The OPEX is calculated multiplying the total annual energy consumed (70 GWh) by a nominal price. Two cases are considered: no inter-annual increase and 1% inflation.

The electrical network in Chile consist of four independent networks, the two most important being Sistema Interconectado Central (SIC) and Sistema Interconectado del Norte Grande (SING). The electricity market is liberalized but there is a distinction between regulated ( P < 2000 kW) and special clients ( P > 2000 kW). Special clients can negotiate directly electricity prices with the producers and/or produce its own energy. Regulated clients are subject to prices fixed twice a year by the government based on the liberalized market prices. Figure 1 shows the time evolution of the mean market price in Chile for the SING/SIC in Chilean Pesos per kWh and e per MWh [ 3 ]. Prior the 2007 crisis, prices were around 40 e /MWh, and during the last 5 years have been stable around 80 e /MWh with 15% oscillations. This is the nominal price that will be considered in this work.

Time evolution of the mean market electricity price in Chile for the SING/SIC in Chilean Pesos per kWh and e per MWh

Multifuel generators

A 8.5 MW combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) is considered in this case: it has high efficiencies ∼ 55% and fast time responses. Since there is already a 2.5 MW generator with these characteristics in the site, it will be only necessary to upgrade it with 6 MW more. We consider an investment cost of 1000 e /kW, i.e., a CAPEX of ∼ 6 M e . Natural Gas supplied by Gas Atacama, whose pipeline passes through the middle of the Armazones-Paranal site, can be used to run these generators. The expected connection cost is ∼ 2.5 M e : a gas sub-station, a low capacity (7000 m 3 per day) 5-km pipeline and a low capacity tank for regulation. In total, the CAPEX of the back-up system is 8.5 M e .

The OPEX is mainly due to the purchase of natural gas. The natural gas prices are high in Chile. The projections from the Chilean government are taken to correct the world market prices to the special case of Chile. The following equation is adopted to estimate the time-dependent price of a kWh generated by CCGT:

where C gas is given by (1+ f N years )·9, N years is the number of years since 2015 and f takes into account the interannual increase of prices. We consider two values: f =0.01 and f =0.1. This equation yields 0.07 e /kWh for 2015.

Due to the strong requirements on the stability of the supply, this system is also a requirement for all renewable energy systems considered.

Cost estimation

The total cost normalized to year 0 is estimated using:

where k is the interest rate, 3%. The lifetime of the observatories and the renewable energy system is taken as 25 years. Table 2 shows the results.

Renewable energy resources available in the site: solar and wind

The Armazones-Paranal site is located in the Atacama desert, 130 km south from Antofagasta and 1200 km north of Santiago de Chile. The Cerro Paranal and Cerro Armazones have a height of 2635 and 3000 m respectively, and they are 22 km apart. The Cerro Paranal is 15 km away from the coast.

The topography in the North of Chile is dominated by the Central Andes, characterized by four topographical segments from West to East: the coast mountain range, the central hollow, the pre Cordillera, and the Cordillera. The Armazones-Paranal site is located in the coast mountain range, 20–40 km wide and with mean heights of 1500–2000 m. The coast mountain range falls rapidly into the sea with active segments of sea abrasion where sea cliffs are present and inactive segments where there is an emerged platform.

The climate is typical of a desert region: day/night thermal differences of up to 10 o C , rainfall smaller than 30 mm and relative humidities in the 5–20% range. The average temperature is ∼ 15 with ∼ 5 o C seasonal variations.

The solar resource

The solar resource is characterized using the 2011 data from a weather station installed in the area [ 4 ]. The measurements available are global and diffuse irradiance in horizontal plane and one axis tracking mode (North-South orientation), temperature. Only 25 days have missing measurements. This data is directly used in the estimation of the electricity production of a solar based renewable energy system. This data contains all sources of time variability and in that sense is more suited for our purpose than satellite based models.

In some special cases, e.g., for missing data periods or to evaluate the inter-annual variability of a wind-solar plant, a simplified model of solar irradiance is used:

where I G is the global solar irradiance incident on a surface that subtends an angle Φ with the sun direction, f d is the fraction of diffuse irradiance and I D is the direct irradiance in the sun direction:

where θ s is the solar zenith angle, I 0 the irradiance when the sun is in the zenith and τ is an atmospheric extinction parameter. Adopting f d =0.05, I 0 =1200 W/m 2 1 and τ =0.1, a good description of the data is found. 2

Figure 2 shows the global irradiance incident on a horizontal and a one-axis tracking surface from data (dashed lines) compared to the model (solid lines) for the 23rd of June 2011. Figure 3 shows the same for the accumulated day irradiance. 34 days out of the 340 analyzed has a predicted irradiance 10% larger than measured (“Cloudy Days”) but only 5 are consecutive.

Global irradiance incident on a horizontal and a one-axis tracking surface from data ( dashed lines ) compared to the model ( solid lines ) for the 23rd of June 2011

Same as Fig. 2 but for the accumulated day irradiance

The temperature is also an important factor that determines the performance of solar plants. The weather station temperature time series is used in our calculations.

The wind resource

Wind and speed direction from the VLT meteo mast is used to characterized the wind resource [ 5 ]. Measurements at 10 and 30 m from the last 15 years exist. Table 3 shows the average wind speeds at 30 m for the last 10 years. Figure 4 shows the wind speed distribution for the year 2011 at 30 m.

Wind speed distribution at 30 m in Cerro Paranal for the year 2011

Renewable energy systems

In this section, the methodology to calculate the time series of electricity production for the wind-solar PV plant with PHES is presented. Then, a modular design of each of the subsystems is described. Finally, the procedure to calculate the cost given any value of installed power, wind to solar fraction and size of the storage system is described.

Electricity production time series: methodology

The following definitions will be adopted:

P P ( t ) MW : time series of power produced by solar/wind plant.

P D ( t ) MW : time series of power demand.

P A ( t ) MW : time series of power available to satisfy the demand (either from wind/solar plant or storage system).

E S and E MSC MWh: storage level and maximum storage capacity.

P to store and P \(_{max}^{to~store}\) : power to store and maximum instantaneous power that the storage system is able to store.

s 1 /s 2 : efficiency of the storage system to store/deliver electricity. It can depend on load.

t 1 /t 2 /t 3 : transport efficiencies (transformer and lines) between solar/wind plant-storage system (t 1 ), storage system-demand site (t 2 ) and solar/wind plant-demand site (t 3 ). t 1 /t 2 /t 3 depends on the location of each subsystem and transmission line type. For our case and using standard calculations they are: 97, 97.5, and 98%.

Time series are calculated in 10 min intervals. If P P > P D energy is stored with efficiency s 1 × t 1 , unless P to store > P \(_{max}^{to~store}\) or the storage system is full. If P P < P D energy is extracted from the storage system with efficiency s 2 × t 2 until depleted. The efficiency t 3 is also applied to the fraction of P P that directly satisfy the demand.

E \(_{loss}^{Stg}\) accounts for the energy lost because of P \(_{max}^{to~store}\) and E MSC . E \(_{loss}^{Eff}\) accounts for losses due to s 1 / s 2 . E \(_{loss}^{Transport}\) accounts for losses in transport. E \(_{loss}^{Avail}\) accounts for availability: it is included assuming that on the 15th day of each month all systems are stopped for maintenance (3.3%). It is only applied to the annual energy production.

E P , E D , and E A are the annual sum P P , P D , and P A . Other definitions:

f cover =E A /E D : energy coverage.

\(f_{loss}^{Stg}\) = E \(_{loss}^{Stg}\) /E P : energy loss due to storage size and storage maximum power.

\(f_{loss}^{All}\) =( E \(_{loss}^{Stg}\) + E \(_{loss}^{Eff}\) + E \(_{loss}^{Transport}\) + E \(_{loss}^{Avail.}\) )/ E P : total energy loss.

Solar PV plant

We present a modular design of a solar PV plant. The unit cells corresponds to ∼ 1 MWp. The components of the Solar PV plant selected are the following:

Solar panels: Jinko Solar JKM300M. This is a silicon poly-crystalline 300 Wp panel. These modules have the IEC61215 certification which is the standard in Europe.

Inverter/transformer: the Sunny Central SC1000MV. This is a central inverter optimal for large system where production is uniform across the array

Trackers: the ExoSun ExoTrackHZ, suitable for large plants deployed in flat areas. This is a one axis tracker (axis orientation North-South).

The number of panels to be placed in series is calculated using: N series = V op,inv / V mpp,panel , where V op,inv is 450–820 V and V mpp,panel is 35–40 V depending on irradiance. This gives between 11 and 23 panels per string . The open circuit voltage of a string ( N series x45 V) should not exceed the maximum operating voltage of the inverter (880 V). For that reason 18 panels per string are chosen. 30 string s will be connected to a tracker forming a block , fulfilling the tracker specifications. All strings within a block are connected in parallel to an inverter. The number of blocks to be connected in parallel to reach the nominal inverter power is given by \(\frac {P_{inverter}}{N_{blocks}\times 30 \times 18 \times P_{nom,panel}}\) . This yields six blocks per inverter, which also complies with the restriction that the short circuit current does not exceed the maximum allowable current of the inverter.

Each string is a 2 x 18 m rectangle. 30 of them are placed consecutively (with a spacing of 7 m) to form a block. The spacing is chosen to minimize shading losses. 3 x 3 blocks are placed side by side to minimize DC cabling forming a unit cell, a rectangle of ∼ 280 x 64 m.

The power produced by the solar PV plant in a given time period is given by:

where I G ( Φ ) is the global solar irradiance on a surface with an incidence angle Φ , I stc the irradiance in standard conditions 1000 W/m 2 , the factors f therm . and f shading take into account the thermal and shading losses that depend on irradiance, ambient temperature and sun position, the factor f cte are losses that have no dependencies on the time period considered. The angle Φ is calculated for each period so the solar vector lies within the plane perpendicular to the aperture. The only exception is when the required solar panel elevation is smaller than what trackers allow (40 o , since trackers can rotate ±50 o ). In that case, the incidence angle is calculated for a fixed elevation of 40 o .

The thermal losses are calculated using:

where g is the thermal losses coefficient (0.4% per o C ), T std is the temperature in standard conditions (25 o C ) and T panel is the panel temperature that can be calculated using:

where T c is the characteristic temperature of the panel, 45 o C in our case, and T ambient is the ambient temperature taken from the weather station.

The shading losses are estimated by geometric calculations for each time period considered. The constant losses are 7%, see Table 4 .

Panel degradation is 20% over 25 years. Only the production of the first year is calculated. To maintain it over 25 years, extra power will be deployed that will be accounted in the OPEX of the plant.

Using the meteo-mast data and a topographic map of the area, we followed the standard procedure to design a wind farm. The software WASP is used to generate a wind resource map (WRG), see Fig. 5 . Then, the OpenWind Software is used to design wind farms with two, five, and ten turbines. The location is 15 km to the west of Cerro Paranal in the Coastal Cliff, where the wind power density is the highest. The wind turbine chosen is the Alstom ECO 80 2.0 Class 2. It is a pitch regulated 2 MW wind turbine, with a hub height of 80 m, a cut-in wind of 4 m/s and a cut-off wind of 25 m/s.

Map of the wind power density to the west of Cerro Paranal. The wind power density is higher in the pink areas . We also show the wind direction rose at the location of the Cerro Paranal. The areas with high wind density on the left correspond to the Coastal Cliff, about 15 km away from the Cerro Paranal

The mentioned software does not provide a time series of the produced electricity. This is a problem for our study: an storage system cannot be dimensioned without them. To overcome this problem, we use the following assumption to characterized the time series:

where P Turbine is the turbine power as a function of air density and wind speed at hub height:

where v 30 ( t ) is the measured temporal series of the meteo mast at 30 m, f vertical is a factor to extrapolate measurements to different heights:

and f horizontal is a factor that takes into account the geographical variations of the wind speed. The value of f horizontal is adjusted so Eq. 8 gives the same duty factor as OpenWind.

The PV and Wind plant requires an electricity based storage system that fulfills the following criteria:

Power: ∼ 10 MW.

Discharge time at output power: more than 12 h.

Response time: ∼ 10–30 min.

Lifetime 25 years.

Efficiency: high, at least 75%.

Technologically mature.

The only technology that matches these criteria is the pumped hydro energy storage (PHES). The site is located in the Atacama desert where water is scarce. Due to the proximity to the coast, there is the possibility to use sea water as storage medium. However, due to the size of the facility and plausible technological and environmental problems, it is advised the use of desalinated water either self produced or bought.

The PHES plant consist in an upper and lower water reservoir connected by penstocks, and a system of turbines and pumps than convert gravitational energy into electricity or vice versa. The system is closed, so filling of the reservoirs has to be done only once. A separate turbine and pumping system is planned, so typical elapsed times to go from pumping to full load generation are of the order of minutes. Water evaporation 4 and filtration of water are important and will be taken into account in the design. P \(_{max}^{to~store}\) is fixed to 14 MW, so hydraulic losses does not severely affect the design.

The hydro power in W is given by:

where ρ is the water density in kg/m 3 , g is the gravity acceleration constant in m/s 2 , Q is the water flow rate through the penstocks in m 3 /s, and δ h n is the net height difference given by:

where δ h g is the gross height difference and δ h ( Q ) are the hydraulic losses in the whole system that depend on the flow rate. The electric power in generation mode is given by:

where η turb and η gen is the efficiency of the turbine (that depends on load) and the generator. The electric power in storage mode is given by:

where η pump and η mot is the efficiency of the pump system (that depends on load) and the motor.

The required value of P e turb / P e pump is 8.5/14 MW.

The design of the system proceeds in two phases:

Site selection.

Plant design.

The site selection implies indirectly choosing two important variables: δ h g and penstock length. The second variable is crucial when determining the hydraulic losses, and is an important contributor to the total cost of the system. As a general rule, larger values of δ h g and smaller penstock length yield smaller investment costs. However, other factors have been analyzed:

Existence of infrastructures like roads and transmission lines.

Existence of hydro resources or possibilities to obtain them.

Earthquake risks.

Detritus removal: short but intense rainfalls can generate detritus removal that can affect the integrity of the PHES.

Topographic maps have been used to choose four possible sites. All sites have similar availability of water/infrastructures and geological risks. Therefore, the site with larger height difference and the smaller penstock length was chosen. Figure 6 shows a detailed topographic map of the site. It is located in the Coastal Cliff, close to the Wind Farm location.

3D map of the selected PHES site together with the elevation contour

Our choice for the turbine system is the use of two Pelton turbines with one injector that can work in parallel to provide the maximum power. The Pelton turbines can work up to 10% of the nominal load, have efficiencies around 90% and are adequate for the site height differences and required nominal flows. The turbines will be coupled to two generators with nominal power 5 MW, AC output voltage of 6 kV and 98% efficiency.

Regarding the pumping system configuration, our choice is the use of multistage centrifugal pumps: 6 of 2 MW and 2 of 0.5 MW. To simplify the calculations an efficiency of 90% for all loads is considered. The motors that drive the pumps work at 6 kV with an efficiency of 98%.

Steel penstocks have rugosities of ∼ 0.6 mm. The hydraulic losses are calculated using standard formulas for different pipe diameters. For each case, the nominal flow rate in production and storage mode is calculated by solving iteratively Eq. 13 /Eq. 14 . The hydraulic losses drop below 5% in both modes at nominal conditions for a tube diameter of 0.85 m. Losses because of other hydraulic components like valves, bypasses, contractions/expansions, etc. are small (10% of Penstock losses) and taken into account. Table 5 gives the final nominal flow rate and hydraulic losses in both modes. Using these calculations the storage efficiencies s 1 and s 2 are calculated.

The penstock wall thickness required to withstand the hydrostatic pressure is given by:

where e s is extra thickness in meters to allow for corrosion, k f is the weld efficiency (0.9), D is the pipe diameter in meters, σ f is the allowable tensile stress in Pascals (1400 kgf/cm 2 , i.e., 1.373 10 5 Pa) and P is the hydrostatic pressure in Pascals. Since the hydrostatic pressure changes from the upper to the lower reservoir, the penstock is built in sections of 100 m with decreasing thickness (10–30 mm). The total weight of the penstock is ∼ 1000 tons.

The surge pressure for the water-hammer effect at the pumping nominal load is 450 m, which would require a substantial increase of the thickness walls that would yield to a doubling of the total penstock weight, i.e. its cost. For that reason, the installation of a surge tower or relief valves is necessary.

The free parameter of the design is the maximum storage capacity, E MSC MWh. For a given value of E MSC , the volume of the water reservoirs is calculated by multiplying the flow rate in generation mode by E MSC /8.5 h, adding a 20% safety margin. In the selected site, there is room for reservoirs with storage capacities up to 1000 MWh.

The reservoirs will be constructed following the scheme of an Earth/Rock filled dam. The depth of the reservoir will be 14 m, leaving 1.3 m between the maximum water level and the top of the dam. The digged material will be reused to build the trapezoidal perimetral dike (3:1), which fixes the dimensions of the reservoir. The surface in contact with the water and the air-water layer is covered by a geotextile cloth.

To build and maintain the upper reservoir it is necessary to construct a 12 km access road. In the case of the lower reservoir there is a nearby access road, so only a short and flat connection to it is necessary. It will be also necessary to build a housing for the electromechanical equipment.

The total cost after 25 years of the wind-solar PV plant with PHES storage is estimated using Eq. 2 . The CAPEX in that equation has the following components:

Solar PV and wind plant: total power installed times a unitary cost of 1,700 e /kW.

PHES: the cost of a PHES system with E MSC =110 MWh is estimated to be 26.4 M e . Table 6 shows a breakdown. The PHES cost for different values of E MSC is estimated using:

where C 1 =3.8 M e is the baseline cost of water and reservoir and C 2 =19.51 M e is the cost of the rest of the subsystems.

Back up system: 8.5 M e .

Electrical infrastructures: 3.5 M e , see Table 7 .

The OPEX has the following components:

Insurance and O&M: we assume 2% of CAPEX with 3% inter annual increase.

Gas purchases: (1− f cover )·70 GWh times the unitary price given by Eq. ??.

Solar PV: the required annual enhancement of the power installed to reach the same nominal production as the first year 5 .

The electricity production is simulated for the following parameters:

P total MW : 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, and 40.

f solar : 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1.

E MSC MWh: 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 240, 480, 1000.

An example of the time series is shown in Fig. 7 for P total =20 MW, f solar =0.5 and E MSC =100 MWh. For each simulated case, the annual value of f cover and \(f_{loss}^{All}\) is calculated. The left (right) panel in Fig. 8 show an example: f cover ( \(f_{loss}^{All}\) ) as a function of the total installed power for E MSC =0 MWh and three cases of f solar , 0, 0.5, and 1. For this value of E MSC , the optimum system in terms of coverage is neither purely wind or solar, but a mixture. \(f_{loss}^{All}\) for small P total is due to availability and transport.

An example of the time series of electricity production for P total =20 MW, f solar =0.5 and E MSC =100 MWh

f cover and \(f_{loss}^{All}\) as a function of the total installed power for E MSC =0 MWh and three cases of f solar , 0, 0.5, and 1

On the basis of the costs shown in Table 2 , we select two target maximum costs: 100 and 130 M e . For each simulated case, the total cost over 25 years is calculated as in “ Cost estimation ” section. The case with a cost below the target and with maximum coverage is kept. The two cases selected for the two targets are shown in Table 8 . The coverage factors are as large as 64 and 88%. It should be mentioned that the losses for the high cost target are driven by the storage efficiency, transport losses, and availability.

Finally, the case of a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant with thermal energy storage is analyzed. This technology is considered separately since the storage system cannot be used simultaneously by the Wind farm 6 . The design and costs are presented in Appendix . The total cost is 124 M e and f cover 72.5%. This alternative is within the high cost target, but it has lower coverage factor than the case presented in this section.

1 I 0 is only 12% smaller than the irradiance outside the atmosphere (1370 W/m 2 ), which is an indicator of the quality of the site.

2 The electricity production using the model and the raw data for the reference year agrees within 5%.

3 α =0.08 from the ratio of the measurements at 10 and 30 m. A conservatively smaller value is taken: measurements at 10 m can be affected by the surrounding buildings

4 According to our estimations, it can be severe, reducing the water level by almost 3 m per year.

5 It is calculated assuming: PV system prices will decrease at a rate of 20% over 25 years; PV module degradation is 20% over 25 years.

6 Electricity from the Wind Farm would have to be converted into thermal energy. To convert back to electricity the efficiency is given by the steam turbine, ∼ 32%.

Concentrated solar power (CSP) plant with thermal energy storage

The CSP is a technology that needs to be considered when there is plenty available land, the cloudy fraction is small and the fraction of direct irradiance is high. The dessert characteristics of the site fulfill these three criteria. The technology considered in this work is the parabolic trough collectors (PTC), widely considered in a stage of maturity.

In a CSP plant, an oil is heated in the solar field from 293 o C to 393 o C and sent either to the thermal storage system or to a heat exchanger that produces water vapour at 380 o C and 104 bar. The vapour is then conducted to a steam turbine coupled to a generator. After the turbine, the vapour is taken to a condenser and fed again into the loop. Due to the scarcity of water in the site, aerocondensers are considered. The efficiency to convert thermal energy into electricity depends on the nominal power of the turbine and for a 10 MW steam turbine is ∼ 32%.

The solar field is an array of PTCs. The mirrors have a one axis tracking system (North-South) that ensures that at all moments the solar vector lies within the plane perpendicular to the aperture of the collector. Alignment is a strong requirement in PTCs, and also cleaning.

The PTCs have lengths between 100 and 150 m. The 8 module EuroTrough collector with PTR-70 Schott tubes is selected. N series of these modules are placed in series to form a group. N parallel groups are connected in parallel in central feeding configuration to minimize pipe lengths. The separation between rows of collectors is three times the width of the parabola to ensure that annual shadowing losses are below 1%.

The thermal power captured by the collector is given by:

where \(\eta _{opt \phi =0^{0}}~K(\Phi)\phantom {\dot {i}\!}\) is a parameterization of the optical and geometrical losses of the collector, A c is the aperture area, I D is the direct irradiance in W/m 2 at the period considered, F e is a factor that takes into account the dirt in the mirrors (0.95), and P losses are the thermal losses parameterized with its dependence on the temperature difference between the fluid and the ambient, as well as on the direct irradiance and incidence angle.

The collected power can also be written as:

where Q m is the fluid mass flow in kg/s, C p is the specific heat in J/K Kg and T in /T out is the start/final temperature of the fluid. The thermal fluid chosen is an oil called Therminol VP1. Its maximum working temperature is 398 o and solidification temperature is 12 o . This fluid has to be pressurized to 10.5 bar so it is not gas phase at the maximum working temperature. The specific heat and density depends on temperature and is taken from a parameterization provided by the manufacturer.

N series of collectors have to rise the fluid temperature from T in =293 o C to T out =393 o C. The necessary value of Q m is calculated iteratively by equating Eqs. 17 and 18 in 1 m intervals.

The fluid must circulate in a regime turbulent enough to avoid thermal gradients between the external/internal face of the tube that can cause fractures. The optimum value of N series is calculated by imposing a condition on the Reynolds number of the circulating fluid for the time of maximum direct irradiance. In our design, N series must be 4.

The hydraulic losses are calculated for each configuration of the system ( N series , N parallel ) and time period considered using the oil and tube characteristics and ambient conditions. Losses in the pipes that connect the collectors with the heat exchanger and the losses in the pump are also taken into account. 7 .

The required electrical pumping power is given by:

where η m ( ∼ 70%) and η e ( ∼ 99%) are the mechanical and electrical efficiency of the pump.

The electrical power produced by the plant is given by:

where η is the efficiency to convert thermal to electrical energy (32%). The storage efficiencies considered are s 1 = s 2 =96% (Round trip efficiency of 92%). Transport losses are only applicable to t 3 (2%). The availability is included as described before.

The electricity production described in “ Electricity production time series: methodology ” section is calculated in 10 min intervals during a period of 48 hours around the summer solstice. N parallel is increased until f cover =100%. The required value of N parallel is 33. E MSC is given by the maximum storage level during the design period (100 MWh).

The storage system must be able to store 100 MWh, i.e., 312 MWth. This capacity is increased by a safety margin of 8%, i.e., 337.5 MWhth. The temperature in the hot/cold tank corresponds to the temperature of the oil before/after the heat exchanger. Nitrate salt (60% by weight NaNO 3 and 40% KNO 3 ) is considered as storage medium. The mass required can be calculated using:

which yields 8530 tons of salt to store 337.5 MWth. The corresponding volume of the hot and cold tank is different due to temperature. The volume required for the cold/hot tank is 4471 and 4618 m 3 . Fast fluctuations of the solar resource are easily tracked by the thermal storage system by controlling the flow from the solar field that is diverted to the heat exchanger of the storage system.

The electricity production is then calculated for the whole year. The results are shown in Table 9 together with the main design parameters.

A flat area is necessary to ease installation of the solar field. A possible site has been found 10 km away from Cerro Paranal. The access road to the Cerro Paranal passes by the solar field, so no extra civil works are planned. For electrical infrastructures and their cost, see Table 10 .

The investment cost (CAPEX) of the CSP plant is estimated to be 58.5 M e . Table 11 shows the breakdown. The OPEX considered is 2% of the CAPEX with a 3% inter annual increase. The total cost after 25 years normalized to year 0 is 124 M e .

Abbreviations

British thermal unit

Capital expenditure

Combined cycle gas turbine

• Concentrated solar power

Cherenkov telescope array

European extremely large telescope

European southern observatory

Million US dollars

Open software to design Wind Farms

Operating expenditure

Pumped hydro energy storage

• Photovoltaic

Parabolic Trough Collectors

Sistema interconectado central

Sistema interconectado del Norte Grande

Static synchronous compensator

Very large telescope

Wind energy industry-standard software

Wind Resource Map (Power density)

Interest rate

Global solar irradiance in a surface W/m 2

Direct irradiance in the sun direction

Diffuse irradiance in a surface expressed as a fraction of the direct irradiance

Angle subtended by the normal of a surface with the sun direction

Solar zenith angle

Atmospheric extinction parameter

Time series of power produced by solar/wind plant in MW

Time series of power demand in MW

Time series of power available to satisfy the demand in MW

Annual sum P P ,P D and P A E S and E MSC : Storage Level and Maximum Storage Capacity in MWh

Power to store and Maximum Instantaneous Power that the storage system is able to store

Efficiency of the storage system to store/deliver electricity

Transport efficiencies (transformer and lines) between solar/wind plant-storage system (t 1 ), storage system-demand site (t 2 ) and solar/wind plant-demand site (t 3 )

Energy lost during storage operations due to P \(_{max}^{to~store}\) and E MSC

Energy lost during storage operations due to s 1 / s 2

Energy lost due to transport inefficiencies

Energy lost due to operation and maintenance (availability)

E A /E D energy coverage

E \(_{loss}^{Stg}\) /E P , energy loss due to storage size and storage maximum power

(E \(_{loss}^{Stg}\) +E \(_{loss}^{Eff}\) +E \(_{loss}^{Transport}\) +E \(_{loss}^{Avail.}\) )/E P , total energy loss

The irradiance in standard conditions 1000 W/m 2

Watt Peak, solar panel power for I stc

The solar panel temperature in standard conditions (25 o C )

Solar panel losses, thermal, shading and those that do not depend on solar irradiance

Solar panel thermal loss coefficient

Inverter input voltage range

Solar panel volage at maximum power

Wind speed at hub height

Wind speed height coefficient

Air density

Water density

Gravity acceleration constant

Water flow rate through the penstocks in m 3 /s

Net height difference between upper and lower reservoir in a PHES

Gross height difference

Q dependent hydraulic losses

Efficiencies of turbine, generator, pump and motor in a PHES

Hydro power

Electrical power

Penstock diameter

Length of penstock

Penstock weld efficiency

Allowable tensile stress in Pascals

Hydrostatic pressure in penstock

PTC thermal losses

PTC losses due to dirtying

Thermal power captured by a PTC

Optical and geometrical losses of the collector

Specific heat of PTC thermal fluid

Mass flow in kg/s of the thermal fluid

Temperature in/out of the thermal fluid

Towards a Green Observatory. https://www.eso.org/sci/libraries/SPIE2010/7737-73.pdf . Accessed Feb 2017.

The E-ELT construction proposal. http://www.eso.org/public/products/books . Accessed Feb 2017.

Comision Nacional de Energia de Chile. www.cne.cl. Accessed Feb 2017.

Ministerio de Energía de Chile. http://antiguo.minenergia.cl . Accessed May 2015.

European Southern Observatory. http://archive.eso.org . Accessed Feb 2017.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work would not be possible without the financial support of the CNPq, FAPESP (PROCESSO 2015/15897-1) and the resources of the Instituto de Física de São Carlos. We thank Vitor de Souza for the careful reading of the manuscript, Eduardo Zarza for his guidance with CSP technology, Marcos Blanco for providing the WASP simulations needed to estimate the Wind Resource, Marc Sarazin for his help with the Wind data and ESO water supply, and Natalia Serre for all the information she provided concerning CTA power supply. Finally, we also thank all the Escuela de Organizacion Industrial (EOI) staff for their support.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the development of the work. The corresponding author prepared the manuscript, but all authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Instituto de Física de São Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo, CP 369, São Carlos, 13560-970, SP, Brasil

EOI, Escuela de Organizacion Industrial, Madrid, Spain

H. Abos & H. Martínez-Ortiz

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Ave .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Abos, H., Ave, M. & Martínez-Ortiz, H. A case study of a procedure to optimize the renewable energy coverage in isolated systems: an astronomical center in the North of Chile. Energ Sustain Soc 7 , 7 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-017-0109-0

Download citation

Received : 25 November 2016

Accepted : 10 February 2017

Published : 06 March 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-017-0109-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Pump hydro energy storage
• Applications

Energy, Sustainability and Society

ISSN: 2192-0567

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Requirements of sustainable renewable energy systems case study (Samawah city)

[email protected]

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Reprints and Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Hayder Lafta Albdiery , Suhad K. A. Al-Mosawy; Requirements of sustainable renewable energy systems case study (Samawah city). AIP Conf. Proc. 14 February 2024; 3009 (1): 030052. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0190804

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Renewable energy is a crucial and necessary means of attaining sustainable development. Nevertheless, relying on renewable energy sources is not always sustainable. These sources need advanced and expensive means and techniques to exploit them, in addition to a sophisticated technology that are sometimes monopolistic, and the raw materials needed for the manufacture and production of such equipment are much less prevalent than fossil fuel sources. Therefore, their monopoly is aggravated. Such as Nickel, Lithium, Cadmium, Zinc and other materials that are increasingly needed with the increase in the trend towards using renewable energies. Moreover, the increase in its supply will not meet the increase in demand for it, especially as it is subject to political fluctuations. Such as what happened during the war in Ukraine, where the price of lithium rose by 500% at the beginning of 2022. And the supply chains of photovoltaic equipment and wind turbines be governed by China by 80% and it witnessed great confusion because of what happened due to the closures to combat the Covid 19 epidemic. All of these requests for an extensive study of the requirements for the sustainability of operating and utilization of renewable energies, and this should be our top priority before moving forward on the path of transition to full dependence on renewable energies. Accordingly, we need to localize the industrial base associated with investing renewable energies as an introduction to reach sustainable investment and real solutions to energy issues. We have to determine accurately what is available to us from the elements of the renewable energy industry and what we can replace with local alternatives or provide from sustainable sources if it is not available locally. Only by doing this we will achieve a safe and sustainable transition from traditional energy sector to effective, efficient, sustainable renewable energies investment.

Sign in via your Institution

Citing articles via, publish with us - request a quote.

Sign up for alerts

• Online ISSN 1551-7616
• Print ISSN 0094-243X
• For Researchers
• For Librarians
• For Advertisers
• Our Publishing Partners  
• Physics Today
• Conference Proceedings
• Special Topics

pubs.aip.org

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Connect with AIP Publishing

This feature is available to subscribers only.

Sign In or Create an Account

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.5(1); 2019 Jan

Breaking barriers in deployment of renewable energy

Seetharaman.

a S P Jain School of Global Management, Singapore

Krishna Moorthy

b Faculty of Business and Finance, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar Campus, Perak, Malaysia

Nitin Patwa

c S P Jain School of Global Management, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

d Taylors University, Malaysia

Associated Data

Several economic, institutional, technical and socio-cultural barriers hinder countries from moving from the high to the low emission pathway. The objective of this research is to find out the impacts of social, economic, technological and regulatory barriers in the deployment of renewable energy. Data were collected through an online questionnaire responded to by 223 professionals working in the energy sector all over the globe. This research shows that social, technological and regulatory barriers have a strong influence on the deployment of renewable energy, while economic barriers significantly influence it indirectly. By breaking research and development-related barriers, organizations will be able to invest greatly in developing advanced technologies that can optimize usage of renewable energy and make renewable energy appear more lucrative. With less polluting and lower tariff energy solutions being made available to local people, and higher profits for manufacturers, this will create an atmosphere where all stakeholders are satisfied.

1. Introduction

The world's population is growing at an unprecedented rate and that has necessitated a dramatic increase in energy demand globally. Matching supply with this surging demand is a principal and critical challenge for countries around the world. Currently, this demand is being met through the increased use of fossil fuels. The majority of the world's power is generated from the use of coal, oil and gas. These so-called fossil fuels, when burned, release heat energy which is then converted into electricity releasing into the atmosphere a lot of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas that contributes to the issue of global warming. A renewable energy supply offers a solution to both challenges. For economic growth and human advancement, energy has always been universally considered one of the most crucial measures ( Rawat and Sauni, 2015 ). There is a three-dimensional relationship alongside a bi-directional causal relationship between economy, the environment and energy ( Azad et al., 2014 ).

Globally, the population is growing at fast rate; however, the world's energy demand is likely to grow even more rapidly than the increase in the population. According to International Energy Outlook (2013), global energy demand will be increased by 56 per cent between 2010 and 2040 ( Azad et al., 2014 ). Currently, the majority of the world's energy consumption is satisfied by consuming energy created using fossil fuels. To satisfy the ever-increasing energy demand and to protect the climate, breakthrough advancements have been made in the past to design technologies that can control and harness power from alternative energy sources. As controlling carbon emissions is critical in dealing with climate change, renewable energy is an appropriate way to satisfy energy demand without degrading the ecosystem ( Jing, 2016 ). Apart from bringing environmental sustainability, renewable energy offers another advantage—the ability to provide power to even the most underprivileged people living in the remotest areas where traditional power is not yet available ( Rawat and Sauni, 2015 ).

Awareness of the need to encourage deployment of renewable energy has increased drastically in recent years. More countries, whether developed or developing, are promoting and changing policies to promote the deployment of renewable energy. In 2005, only 55 countries had taken steps to make renewable targets and create policies supporting renewable energy. This number had increased to 144 countries by 2013, with almost all the world understanding the need to reduce carbon emissions.

2. Background

Despite remarkable promotion and commitment from various nations, only a small percentage of energy is generated from renewable energy, especially in developing countries. This scenario is because of the numerous barriers that control the diffusion of renewable energy. These barriers prevent renewable energy from effectively competing with traditional energy and hamper achievement of the necessary large-scale deployment ( Nasirov et al., 2015 ). Penetration and scale-up of renewable require a strong political and regulatory framework which supports and promotes a continued focus on fossil fuels ( Karatayev et al., 2016 ).

A review of the literature shows that many studies have been conducted to identify barriers to the use of renewable energy. However, very few studies have grouped these barriers and discussed the impact of these barriers in the deployment of renewable energy. The variables which were identified from the literature review for use in future research were social barriers , economic barriers, technological barriers and regulatory barriers.

The objective of this research is to discover the impacts of breaking barriers in the deployment of renewable energy. This research tries to resolve the following questions to reach a solution which is in line with the objective of this research:

• a. What are the factors affecting the deployment of renewable energy and are they significant or not?
• b. What impact will breaking barriers have on the deployment of renewable energy?
• c. In the wake of breaking barriers, is Rogers' (2003) theory of diffusion (political and social) valid for renewable energy?

Theory of diffusion (technical, political & social) in the wake of breaking barriers.

Diffusion of innovation theory is one of the most important concepts in theorizing the changing format of energy provision, being concerned with the process of adoption of innovations by society ( Lacerda et al., 2014 ). Rogers (1983 : 11) defined diffusion as ‘the process by which innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system’ and innovation as ‘an idea, practice or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption’ ( Sahin, 2006 ). Other types of diffusion include social diffusion and theories of change, going back to Lewin's description of the need to alter group standards to promote lasting individual change ( Lewin, 1951 ). The focus has since shifted towards external conditions that are likely to be more influential than group decisions ( Darnton, 2008 ). Political diffusion deals with the spread of policies and governance approaches across jurisdictional boundaries which come about because of external pressures and/or internal pressures relating to quests for legitimacy ( Weyland, 2005 ). More fundamentally, diffusion defines the often random movement of a characteristic. The theory of diffusion is used to understand the attitude and perception of people with regard to government policies.

4. Hypotheses

This literature review looks at the outcomes of penetration and deployment of renewable energy, which are affected by four major factors: social barriers, economic barriers, technological barriers and regulatory barriers.

4.1. Social barriers

The transition from conventional resources to renewable energy has encountered public resistance and opposition. This is due to a lack of awareness of the benefits of renewable energy, disruption of seascape, and acquisition of land which could have been used for agriculture, tourism, etc. ( Goldsmiths, 2015 ).

Public awareness and information barriers: Sustainable development stems from the satisfaction of human desires, through socially recognized technological systems and suitable policies and regulatory tools ( Paravantis et al., 2014 ). The main concerns with respect to public understanding are: 1) insufficient information regarding ecological and financial benefits; 2) inadequate awareness of renewable energy technologies (RET); and 3) uncertainties about the financial feasibility of RE installation projects ( Nasirov et al., 2015 ).

Not in my backyard’ (NIMBY) syndrome: According to NIMBY syndrome, people do support renewable energy generally, but not in their own neighbourhood. Renewable power project proposals often face opposition from individual citizens, political leaders, grassroots organizations, national interest groups and, in some cases, even environmental groups ( Jianjun and Chen, 2014 ). Public opposition occurs for a number of reasons, including landscape impact, environmental degradation and lack of consultation concerns among local communities ( Nasirov et al., 2015 ).

Loss of other/alternative income: A major issue with renewable plants (especially solar and wind farms) is the vast area of land required to produce an amount of energy equivalent to that which can be produced from a small coal fire power plant ( Chauhan and Saini, 2015 ).

To make a significant contribution to global energy consumption, there is a need to develop large scale renewable energy plants, but this requires vast areas of countryside. Enormous parts of the countryside, which includes farmland, need to be converted into buildings or roads or any other infrastructure to support a renewable energy power plant. In achieving this, often agriculture, tourism, fishing, etc. can be affected ( Nesamalar et al., 2017 ).

Lack of experienced professionals: Universal transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources requires the solid foundation of a skilled labour force. There is huge demand for skilled professionals to design, build, operate and maintain a renewable energy plant.

Incompetent technical professionals and lack of training institutes prevent renewable energy technologies from scaling new heights ( Ansari et al., 2016 ). There is a need to teach renewable energy courses and for proper training to be conducted to develop the skills required to install and operate renewable energy projects. The shortage of trained workforce to design, finance, build, operate and maintain renewable energy projects is considered a major obstacle to the wide penetration of renewable energy ( Karakaya and Sriwannawit, 2015 ).

Social barriers have a significant influence on the deployment of renewable energy.

Social barriers have a significant influence on economic barriers.

4.2. Economic barriers

Factors influencing economic and financial barriers are high initial capital, lack of financial institutes, lack of investors, competition from fossil fuels, and fewer subsidies compared to traditional fuel ( Raza et al., 2015 ). These factors have prevented renewable energy from becoming widespread.

Tough competition from fossil fuel: Fossil fuels will remain a dominant player in supplying energy in the future. A report by EIA's International Energy Outlook (2016) suggests that fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and coal) are expected to supply 78 per cent of the global energy used in 2040. Investment in fossil fuels (including supply and power generation) still accounts for 55 per cent of 2016 global energy investment, compared with 16 per cent for renewable energy. Coal is still a dominant fuel source in most counties because of its abundance, which makes it cheap and accessible ( Dulal et al., 2013 ). There have been huge changes in energy since summer 2014. Oil, as measured by the Brent crude contract, which was priced at $115.71/barrel in June 2014, fell to $27.10 on 20 January 2016, a huge drop of 76 per cent. Similarly, the ARA coal contract dropped from $84/tonne in April 2014 to $36.30 in February 2016. There was a huge decline in the price of natural gas, which slid from around $4.50/MMBtu in June 2014 to $1.91 in mid-February 2016. Due to falling prices and fossil fuel still emerging as a cheaper alternative to renewable energy, it is able to offer tough competition to renewable energy projects.

Government grants and subsidies: The amount of government subsidies provided to conventional energy is much higher than the subsidies awarded to renewable energy. This keeps renewable energy at a disadvantage. The subsidies provided by governments to generate electricity from fossil fuel sources is overshadowing the wide use of low emission technologies. For example, coal companies in Australia and Indonesia still receive government subsidies for mining and exploration ( Dulal et al., 2013 ).

Fewer financing institutions: Renewable energy developers and producers face severe difficulties in securing financing for projects at rates which are as low as are made available for fossil fuel energy projects ( Ansari et al., 2016 ). There are limited financial instruments and organizations for renewable project financing. This reflects that the investments are considered somewhat risky, thus demotivating investors ( Ohunakin et al., 2014 ).

High initial capital cost: Renewable energy projects require high initial capital cost and, because of the lower efficiency of renewable technology, the net pay back period is high, which in turn pushes investors on to the back foot ( Ansari et al., 2016 ). Both the users and the manufacturers may have very low capital and to install a plant they require capital financing. This problem is further highlighted by the strict lending measures that restrict access to financing even when funding is available for traditional energy projects ( Suzuki, 2013 ). High cost of capital, often lack of capital and most important with high payback period projects often becomes un-viable ( Painuly. J, 2001 ).

Intangible costs: Currently, in almost all countries, the total cost of fuel includes the cost of exploration, production, distribution and usage, but it does not include the cost of the damage it does to the environment and society. Despite severe effects on health and on the atmosphere, the unseen costs (externalities) which are connected with traditional fuels are not included in their price ( Arnold, 2015 ). Understanding these impacts is essential for evaluating the actual cost of utilizing fossil fuels for energy generation.

Economic barriers have a significant influence on the deployment of renewable energy.

4.3. Technological barriers

There are a number of legitimate technological barriers to the widespread deployment of renewable energy, including limited availability of infrastructure, inefficient knowledge of operations and maintenance, insufficient research and development initiatives, and technical complexities like energy storage and unavailability of standards ( Zhao et al., 2016 ).

Limited availability of infrastructure and facilities: There is limited availability of advanced technologies required for renewable energy, especially in developing countries, which acts as a factor preventing penetration of renewable energy. Even if this technology is available, the cost of procuring it is very high ( Dulal et al., 2013 ). Since renewable energy power plants are mostly placed in remote locations, they require additional transmission lines to connect to the main grid. Since most of the existing grids are not designed to integrate with renewable energy, these existing grids need to be upgraded or modified ( Izadbakhsh et al., 2015 ). Grid integration is amongst the biggest problems affecting the development of renewable energy projects.

Lack of operation and maintenance culture: Since renewable energy technology is comparatively new and not optimally developed, there is a lack of knowledge about operation and maintenance. Efficiency cannot be achieved if a plant is not optimally operated and if maintenance is not carried out regularly ( Sen and Bhattacharyya, 2014 ). Lack of availability of equipment, components and spare parts will require a substantial increase in the production costs, as these items need to be imported from other countries, therefore being procured at high prices and so increasing the overall cost ( Bhandari et al., 2015 ).

Lack of research and development (R&D) capabilities: Investment in research and development (R&D) is insufficient to make renewable energies commercially competitive with fossil fuel. Both governments and energy firms shy away from spending on R&D as renewable energy is in its development stage and risks related to this technology are high ( Cho et al., 2013 ).

Technology complexities: There are not enough standards, procedures and guidelines in renewable energy technologies in terms of durability, reliability, performance, etc. This prevents renewable energy from achieving large scale commercialization ( Nasirov et al., 2015 ). A major technical issue which renewable energy is facing today is the storage of energy. The supply of sun or wind is not continuous despite their infinite abundance and electricity grids cannot operate unless they are able to balance supply and demand. To resolve these issue, large batteries need to be developed which can compensate for the times when a renewable resource is not available ( Weitemeyer et al., 2014 ).

Technological barriers have a significant influence on the deployment of renewable energy.

Technological barriers have a significant influence on economic barriers.

4.4. Regulatory barriers

Factors like lack of national policies, bureaucratic and administrative hurdles, inadequate incentives, impractical government targets, and lack of standards and certifications have prevented renewable energy from expanding dramatically ( Stokes, 2013 ).

Ineffective policies by government: Strong regulatory policies within the energy industry are not only required for a nation's sustainable development, but also resolve the inconsistency between renewable and non-renewable energy. Lack of effective policies creates confusion among various departments over the implementation of the subsidies. Major issues such as unstable energy policy, insufficient confidence in RET, absence of policies to integrate RET with the global market and inadequately equipped governmental agencies act as barriers to the deployment of renewable energy projects ( Zhang et al., 2014 ).

Inadequate fiscal incentives: There have not been enough measures by governments to remove tax on imports of the equipment and parts required for renewable energy plants. Feed-in tariffs are the measures by which governments aim to subsidize renewable energy sources to make them cost-competitive with fossil fuel-based technologies, but the absence of these adequate financial incentives results in high costs that hinder the industry's development, operation and maintenance, and stagnate the future ( Sun and Nie, 2015 ).

Administrative and bureaucratic complexities: Obstacles arising in the deployment of renewable energy projects are manifold, including (and not limited to) administrative hurdles such as planning delays and restrictions. Lack of coordination between different authorities and long lead times in obtaining authorization unnecessarily increase the timeline for the development phase of the project. Higher costs are also associated with obtaining permission due to lobbying. All these factors prolong the project start-up period and reduce the motivation required to invest in renewable energy ( Ahlborg & Hammar, 2014 ).

Impractical government commitments: There is a gap between the policy targets set by governments and the actual results executed by implementation ( Goldsmiths, 2015 ). There is a lack of understanding of a realistic target and loopholes in the implementation process itself. The responsibility for overcoming these commitment issues lies with governments. Policies should be devised that can offer clear insight into important legislation and regulatory issues so that the industry can be promoted as stable and offering growth. Governments can fix this mismatch by becoming more responsive and reactive.

Lack of standards and certifications: Standards and certificates are required to ensure that the equipment and parts manufactured or procured from overseas are in alignment with the standards of the importing company. These certifications make sure that companies are operating the plant in compliance with local law. Absence of such standards creates confusion and energy producers have to face unnecessary difficulties ( Emodi et al., 2014 ).

Regulatory barriers have a significant influence on the deployment of renewable energy.

Regulatory barriers have a significant influence on economic barriers.

4.5. Breaking barriers in deployment of renewable energy

Deployment of renewable energy is crucial not only to meet energy demands but also to address concerns about climate change ( Byrnes et al., 2013 ). However, the barriers (social, economic, technological and regulatory) existing in this sector prevents the development and penetration of renewable energy globally.

User-friendly procedures: Bureaucratic procedures in the deployment of renewable energy are considered the biggest hindrance, and this demotivates investors and entrepreneurs from entering and investing in renewable energy. Government policies are not aligned at national and state level, thus failing to attract energy sector investment ( Nesamalar et al., 2017 ). Countries with excessively complicated administrative procedures have less penetration of renewable energy compared to countries with simple and straightforward procedures ( Huang et al., 2013 ).

Higher stakeholder satisfaction: Energy is the backbone of the socioeconomic development of any country ( Raza et al., 2015 ). By utilizing more renewable energy resources, nations can help fulfil energy deficiencies without damaging nature. The repercussions of this change would be the creation of more jobs in the designing, building, operation and maintenance of renewable energy project infrastructures. Higher levels of diffusion will help to achieve economies of scale, and that will bring down the costs and thus the price for the end user. This will improve investors' confidence and will trigger increased investments in renewable energy projects. Higher benefits can be reaped from the availability of green energy as there will not be severe environmental implications, and that can help in maintaining the earth's ecosystem.

Successful research and development (R&D) ventures: In a study conducted by Halabi et al. (2015) , it was pointed out that technological advancement to effectively generate, store and distribute renewable energy at lower costs is crucial. However, compared to conventional energy, insufficient R&D initiatives are undertaken. This is due to fact that organizations are unable to earn beneficial returns from R&D, and that makes the future of these initiatives look dull.

Cost savings: The biggest challenge that renewable energy faces is the competition from low cost fossil fuels ( El-katiri, 2014 ). Renewable energy projects require huge land areas to produce the amount of energy which a conventional plant can produce in a small area. Prohibitive costs are involved in establishing and running renewable energy projects, mainly due to the huge financial capital required to acquire a suitable piece of land, the costs associated with lobbying, and power losses due to inefficient energy storage capabilities.

5. Methodology

The research framework of this study is given in Fig. 1 below:

Research framework.

5.1. Data collection

The survey questionnaire (please see the questionnaire) was framed based on independent variables and their sub-variables. The questionnaire, a pretesting of the questionnaire was conducted to ensure that all the questions were relevant and understandable to respondents. Initially, the survey questionnaire was sent out to 33 energy industry experts and their feedbacks were collected. The insights generated from this pilot testing led to further refinement of the questionnaire and a final questionnaire was developed. The final survey form consisted of 26 main questions for both dependent and independent variables and another three questions to understand the demographics of the respondent. Each question consisted of five options (Likert scale) from which the respondent had to select the one which he/she thought suited the best, with ‘1’ as strongly disagree and ‘5’ as strongly agree.

5.2. Profile of respondents

The survey respondents were professionals in the energy industry (manufacturing of rigs, power generation, power distribution, oil and gas, mining and renewable energy). The participants were selected based on their familiarity with and knowledge of renewable energy sources and technology across America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Africa and Australia. The survey questionnaire was sent out to 645 potential respondents, of which only 223 practical survey responses were received. The response rate is calculated to be 34.5 per cent. The demographics of the respondents are provided in Table 1 .

Demographics of the respondents (n = 223) with respect to job level, region and industry sector across energy sector.

5.3. Data analysis

The data collected from the survey questionnaire were analysed using ADANCO 2.0.1 software. ADANCO software is used for this purpose as it is specialised for variance based structural equation modelling. It implements several limited information estimators such as partial least squares path modelling or ordinary least squares regression based on sum scores for testing the hypothesis and analysing research models ( Henseler et al., 2014 ). To verify the correlation and confidence in the hypotheses, ADANCO software works well as it does not enforce normality on the data. Data analysis was conducted by first gauging the modelling of the structural model and then measuring the reliability and validity of the model by estimating model parameters.

5.4. Reliability

Cronbach's alpha value was considered to determine the reliability of the model fit. Alpha values above 0.7 show a satisfactory level of reliability. Jöreskog's Rho value also confirms that the model is consistent and uniform: i.e. composite reliability is within the appropriate range ( Marshall, 2014 ). The figures for each construct are listed in Table 3 .

Discriminant validity: Fornell-Larcker criteria.

5.5. Convergent validity

Convergent validity can be defined as the degree to which two measures of constructs that theoretically should be related are in fact related ( Campbell and Fiske, 1959 ). The value of average variance extracted is required to be above 0.5 in order to be accepted. The convergent validity is shown in Table 2 below. The minimum AVE value obtained is 0.5042, which proves that the validity of this model is acceptable.

Overall Reliability of the construct and Convergent validity.

5.6. Discriminant validity

Discriminant validity is used to test if the models or concepts that are not in relation are unrelated. According to Fornell and Larcker's theory ( Cable et al., 2014 ), if the root of the average variance extracted (AVE) of one path is less than the average variance extracted (AVE) of the other path, then it is considered accepted. In Table 3 below, Fornell and Larcker's theory is successfully matched; thus the discriminant validity of this model is satisfactory.

5.7. Structural equation model (SEM)

Structural modelling through bootstrapping is provided in Fig. 2 . Path analysis is a special case of structural equation modelling and employs a causal modelling approach to explore the correlations within a defined network. This correlation is equated by calculating the sum of the contributions of the paths that connect all the variables. To evaluate the strength of each path, products of the path coefficients along the path are calculated ( Schreiber et al., 2015 ). The R-squared value of our research model is 0.545, which supports the research model.

Structural modelling through bootstrapping.

5.8. Hypothesis testing

ADANCO 2.0.1 is used to conduct hypothesis testing because it uses variance to model structural equations. The bootstrapping option can be selected in the ADANCO software to model unknown population data ( Sarstedt et al., 2011 ). The level of significance is measured by establishing the t-statistic. The outcomes of the hypothesis testing is given in Table 4 below:

Outcomes of the hypothesis testing.

Note: SB = social barriers; EB = economic barriers; TB = technological barriers; RB = regulatory barriers; RE = deployment of renewable energy.

In total, seven hypotheses were identified. Out of the seven hypotheses, six hypotheses are accepted as their path coefficient is either positively or significantly related. A detailed explanation of each hypothesis is given below.

Hypotheses H1 highlights the influence of social barriers on the deployment of renewable energy. The effect of social barriers is moderately significant with (t- value = 1.8749) and (β=0.1063, p < 0.01) thus hypothesis H1 got accepted. This shows that social barriers have a moderate influence on the deployment of renewable energy. Earlier studies ( Paravantis et al., 2014 ) have advised that future studies be conducted to determine whether renewable energy is socially accepted. In our study, the positively related t-value testifies to a positive level of significance, implying that social barriers are still a hindrance to the deployment of renewable energy. Fig. 3 below shows the Social barriers with associated path coefficients.

Social barriers with associated path coefficients.

Hypothesis H2 highlights the impact of social barriers on economic barriers. The effect of social barriers is highly significant with (t- value = 4.505) and (β=0.317, p < 0.01) was accepted. This indicates that the parameters, such as opportunity cost and opposition by residents, strongly influence economic parameters. Earlier studies ( Jianjun and Chen, 2014 ) have supported that social barriers impact economic parameters. However, the earlier studies did not conduct research to understand the strength of the impact. Through our survey, we have determined that social barriers do have a strong correlation with the economic barriers associated with the implementation of renewable energy.

Hypothesis H3 tested the influence of economic barriers on the deployment of renewable energy. The statistical results with (t- value = 0.4968) and (p > 0.01) as not supported. This indicates that the parameters of economic barriers do not influence the deployment of renewable energy directly. Previous studies ( Boie et al., 2014 ) have pointed out that financial and economic parameters act as hurdles in the wide usage of renewable energy. However, this research contradicts the earlier findings. Fig. 4 below depicts the Economic barriers with associated path coefficients.

Economic barriers with associated path coefficients.

Hypothesis H4 tested the effect of technological barriers on the deployment of renewable energy. The effect of technological barriers is moderately related (t- value = 1.6491) and (β=0.1317, p < 0.01) thus H4 is accepted. This indicates that technological barriers are moderately significant in the deployment of renewable energy. Earlier research ( Gullberg et al., 2014 ) has pointed out that lack of technology advancement has created obstacles for implementing renewable energy. This research paper corroborates the findings of previous studies. Fig. 5 shows the Technological barriers with associated path coefficients.

Technological barriers with associated path coefficients.

Hypothesis H5 examined the impact of technological barriers on economic barriers. The effect of technological barriers on economic barriers is highly significant, with a (t- value = 3.0797) and (β=0.2367, p < 0.01) thus hypothesis H5 is accepted. This indicates that the technological barriers have a highly significant impact on economic barriers. Earlier research ( Zyadin et al., 2014 ) pointed out that lack of research and development has kept the costs of renewable energy higher compared to energy produced from fossil fuels. This study validates the findings of earlier studies.

Hypothesis H6 examined the effects of regulatory barriers on the deployment of renewable energy. Once again, the effect of regulatory barriers on the deployment of renewable energy is highly significant, as the (t- value = 7.7281) and (β=0.5705, p < 0.01). This indicates that regulatory barriers have a significant impact on the implementation of renewable energy. Earlier studies ( Jing, 2016 ) discuss how government policies and administration affect the usage of renewable energy. However, the earlier studies were specific to a country. This study fills the gap by conducting research globally and taking all major countries into consideration. Fig. 6 shows the Regulatory barriers with associated path coefficients.

Regulatory barriers with associated path coefficients.

Hypothesis H7 argued for the effects of regulatory barriers on economic barrier parameters. The effect of regulatory barriers on economic barriers is once more highly significant with (t- value = 5.0687 ) and (β= 0.3249 , p < 0.01) thus supported strongly. This indicates that regulatory barriers have a highly significant impact on economic barriers regarding the deployment of renewable energy. Conversely, the earlier literature ( Harrison, 2015 ) discusses how regulatory and government policies affect the implementation of renewable energy. This research fills the gap by establishing a strong association between regulatory and economic barriers.

7. Discussion & conclusion

Research was conducted to understand the barriers associated with the deployment of renewable energy and the benefits of overcoming these barriers. This research answers all the questions identified as part of the research objective.

Firstly, the factors affecting the deployment of renewable energy were identified and grouped into social, economic, technological and regulatory barriers. This research shows that social, technological and regulatory barriers have a strong influence on the deployment of renewable energy, while economic barriers, though not directly influencing it, and significantly influence it indirectly. Fig. 7 indicates the Deployment of renewable energy and its path coefficients.

Deployment of renewable energy and its path coefficients.

Secondly, in the structural equation model above, the path coefficient of user-friendly procedures is 0.808, that of stakeholder satisfaction is 0.81, successful R&D ventures is 0.86 and cost savings is 0.80. Since the path coefficient for the entire four constructs is equal or greater than 0.80, this implies that breaking barriers in the deployment of renewable energy has a strong impact on all four constructs (user-friendly procedures, stakeholder satisfaction, successful R&D ventures and cost savings).

Finally, the research confirms that political implications have a big impact on the deployment of renewable energy. Technological barriers are preventing renewable energy from being efficient and preventing it from being cost effective. Social awareness and opposition also have a positive impact on the deployment of energy. These results are in line with the theory of diffusion and answer the third question of the research objective.

7.1. Implications for renewable energy industry

In our research, we have studied the impact of various barriers on the deployment of renewable energy. By breaking research and development-related barriers, organizations will be able to invest greatly in developing advanced technologies that can optimize usage of renewable energy and make renewable energy appear more lucrative. With less polluting and lower tariff energy solutions being made available to local people, and higher profits for manufacturers, this will create an atmosphere where all stakeholders are satisfied. Breaking red tape in government procedures will lead to generating interest among investors in renewable energy projects and, by breaking the barriers to the deployment of renewable energy, a greater number of projects will start up. This will help to achieve economies of scale and will bring down operation and maintenance costs. By supporting further innovative technological advancements, more efficient plants will be developed which may require smaller portions of land. Modern technologies will also make offshore wind/solar farms economically feasible.

Though renewable energy would prevent degradation of the environment, however, a small fraction of the ecosystem will still be affected: for example, in the case of offshore wind farms, underwater marine life might be disturbed.

7.2. Limitations and future research

In this research, we have considered the presence of four barriers as factors preventing the successful deployment of renewable energy globally; however, it is reasonable to expect that not all the barriers will be present in each country and there could be some new barriers that have not yet been conceptualized. Though this research has been conducted to understand the global perception, the data collected constituted only 9.8 per cent from Europe, 6.3 per cent from America, 5.9 per cent from the Middle East and Africa, and five per cent from Australia. The research conducted was mainly based on data collected from the Asia Pacific region. Cultural characteristics of Asians can be considered to be different from those of other countries; hence it is advised to practise caution when generalizing the findings in the context of renewable energy.

Finally, regarding future research, further study is required to understand and compare the impact of barriers to renewable energy in developing and developed countries.

7.3. Conclusion

In the long run, due to increasing awareness of environmental damage, conventional power generation based on exhaustible fuels (oil, coal and gas) is generally considered unsustainable. Alternative energies that have minimal impact on the environment and are inexhaustible, such as renewable energy, can be a solution to the long-fought sustainability problem. However, despite on-going awareness of the manifold advantages of renewable energy, the diffusion of renewable energy is limited globally. This restriction has been attributed to social, economic, technological and regulatory barriers.

This research presents the impact of social, economic, technological and regulatory barriers on the deployment of renewable energy and how these barriers are interrelated. Focusing on factors influencing barriers and the deployment of renewable energy, a research model was developed and tested by analysing the data collected from 223 respondents. Respondents were experienced professionals from the energy industry. The findings show that social barriers have a positive impact while technological and regulatory barriers have a very significant impact on the deployment of renewable energy. However, this research shows that economic barriers do not directly impact the deployment of renewable energy, but are interrelated with social, technological and regulatory barriers, thus indirectly affecting the deployment of renewable energy. The simultaneous increase in energy demand and the negative impact of fossil fuels on the environment underscores the need for energy production from renewable energy sources. Renewable energy sources strike a perfect balance between economic, technical and environmental considerations, and contribute to a more sustainable development that will favour future generations.

Declarations

Author contribution statement.

Seetharaman Conceived and designed the experiments.

Krishna Moorthy: Performed the experiments, Analyzed and interpreted the data, Wrote the paper.

Nitin Patwa: Performed the experiments.

Saravanan: Analyzed and interpreted the data.

Yash Gupta: Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data.

Funding statement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

The following is the supplementary data related to this article:

• Ahlborg H., Hammar L. Drivers and barriers to rural electrification in Tanzania and Mozambique: Grid-extension, off-grid and renewable energy technologies. Renew. Energy. 2014; 61 :117–124. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ansari M.F., Kharb R.K., Luthra S., Shimmi S.L., Chatterji S. Analysis of barriers to implement solar power installations in India using interpretive structural modeling technique. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016; 27 :163–174. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arnold U. Economic risk analysis of decentralized renewable energy infrastructures: A Monte Carlo simulation approach. Renew. Energy. 2015; 77 :227–239. [ Google Scholar ]
• Azad A.K., Rasul M.G., Khan M.M.K., Ahasan T., Ahmed S.F. Energy scenario: Production, consumption and prospect of renewable energy in Australia. J. Power Energy Eng. 2014; 2 :19–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhandari B., Lee K., Lee G., Cho Y., Ahn S. Optimization of hybrid renewable energy power systems: A review. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2015; 2 (1):99–112. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boie I., Fernandes C., Frías P., Klobasa M. Efficient strategies for the integration of renewable energy into future energy infrastructures in Europe:An analysis based on transnational modeling and case studies for none European regions. Energy Policy. 2014; 67 :170–185. [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrnes L., Brown C., Foster J., Wagner L.D. Australian renewable energy policy: Barriers and challenges. Renew. Energy. 2013; 60 (1):711–721. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cable D.M., Cable D.M., Derue D.S. The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. J. Appl. Psychol. 2014; 87 (5):875–884. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell D.T., Fiske D.W. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol. Bull. 1959; 56 (2):81. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chauhan A., Saini R.P. Renewable energy based off-grid rural electrification in Uttarakhand state of India: Technology options, modelling method, barriers and recommendations. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015; 51 (December):662–681. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cho C., Yang L., Chu Y., Yang H. Renewable energy and renewable R&D in EU countries. Cointegrat. Anal. 2013; 2 (1):10–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darnton A. Government Social Research Behaviour Change Knowledge Review; UK: 2008. Reference report: An overview of behaviour change models and their uses. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dulal H.B., Shah K.U., Sapkota C., Uma G., Kandel B.R. Renewable energy diffusion in Asia: Can it happen without government support? Energy Policy. 2013; 59 (April):301–311. [ Google Scholar ]
• El-katiri L. 2014. A roadmap for renewable energy in the Middle East and North Africa. [ Google Scholar ]
• Emodi V.N., Yusuf S.D., Boo K. The necessity of the development of standards for renewable energy technologies in Nigeria. Smart Grid Renew. Energy. 2014; 5 (November):259–274. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldsmiths K.R. 2015. Barriers and solutions to the development of renewable energy technologies in the Caribbean. (April) [ Google Scholar ]
• Gullberg A.T., Ohlhorst D., Schreurs M. Towards a low carbon energy future: Renewable energy cooperation between Germany and Norway. Renew. Energy. 2014; 68 (August):216–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halabi M.A., Al-qattan A., Al-otaibi A. Application of solar energy in the oil industry: Current status and future prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015; 43 :296–314. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harrison B. Expanding the renewable energy industry through tax subsidies using the structure and rationale of traditional energy tax subsidies. Univ. Muichigan J. Law Reform. 2015; 48 (3) [ Google Scholar ]
• Henseler J., Dijkstra T.K., Sarstedt M., Ringle C.M., Diamantopoulos A., Straub D.W., Calantone R.J. Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013) Organ. Res. Methods. 2014; 17 (2):182–209. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huang S., Lo S., Lin Y. To re-explore the causality between barriers to renewable energy eevelopment: A case study of wind energy. Energies. 2013; 6 (9):4465–4488. [ Google Scholar ]
• Izadbakhsh M., Gandomkar M., Rezvani A., Ahmadi A. Short-term resource scheduling of a renewable energy based micro grid. Renew. Energy. 2015; 75 (March):598–606. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jianjun J., Chen D.S. Willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A contingent valuation study in Beijing, China. Energy Policy. 2014; 68 (May):340–347. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jing E. Development of renewable energy in Australia and China: A comparison of policies and status. Renew. Energy. 2016; 85 (January):1044–1051. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karakaya E., Sriwannawit P. Barriers to the adoption of photovoltaic systems: The state of the art. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015; 49 :60–66. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karatayev M., Hall S., Kalyuzhnova Y., Clarke M.L. Renewable energy technology uptake in Kazakhstan: Policy drivers and barriers in a transitional economy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016; 66 :120–136. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lacerda J.S., van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Stern D.I. 2014. International diffusion of renewable energy innovations: Lessons from the lead markets for wind power in China, Germany and USA. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewin K. 1951. Field theory in social science. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marshall A.L. 2014. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nasirov S., Silva C., Agostini C.A. Investors’ perspectives on barriers to the deployment of renewable energy sources in Chile. Energies. 2015; 8 (5):3794–3814. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nesamalar J.J.D., Venkatesh P., Raja S.C. The drive of renewable energy in Tamilnadu: Status, barriers and future prospect. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017; 73 (June):115–124. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ohunakin O.S., Adaramola M.S., Oyewola O.M., Fagbenle R.O. Solar energy applications and development in Nigeria: Drivers and barriers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014; 32 :294–301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Painuly J.P. Barriers to renewable energy penetration; a framework for analysis. Renew. Energy. 2001; 24 (1):73–89. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paravantis J., Stigka E., Mihalakakou G. An analysis of public attitudes towards renewable energy in Western Greece. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014; 32 (March 2015):100–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rawat D., Sauni P. Importance and prospects of renewable energy: Emerging issues in India. Int. J. Art Hum. Sci. 2015; 2 (4):11–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raza W., Saula H., Islam S.U., Ayub M., Saleem M., Raza N. Renewable energy resources: Current status and barriers in their adaptation for Pakistan. J. Bioprocess. Chem. Eng. 2015; 3 (3):1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogers Everett M. third ed. Free Press of Glencoe; New York: 1983. Diffusion of innovations. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogers E.M. fifth ed. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahin I. Detailed review of Rogers' diffusion of innovations theory and educational technology-related studies based on Rogers' theory. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2006; 5 (2):14–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarstedt M., Henseler J., Ringle C.M. Multigroup analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modeling: Alternative methods and empirical results. In: Sarstedt M., Schwaiger M., Taylor C.R., editors. Measurement and research methods in international marketing (Advances in international marketing, volume 22) Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2011. pp. 195–218. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schreiber J.B., Nora A., Stage F.K., Barlow E.A., King J. Reporting modeling analysis and confirmatory results: Equation factor review. J. Educ. Res. 2015; 99 (6):323–337. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sen R., Bhattacharyya S.C. Off-grid electricity generation with renewable energy technologies in India: An application of HOMER. Renew. Energy. 2014; 62 :388–398. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stokes L.C. The politics of renewable energy policies: The case of feed-in tariffs in Ontario, Canada. Energy Policy. 2013; 56 :490–500. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sun P., Nie P. A comparative study of feed-in tariff and renewable portfolio standard policy in renewable energy industry. Renew. Energy. 2015; 74 (February):255–262. [ Google Scholar ]
• Suzuki M. 2013. What are the roles of national and international institutions to overcome barriers in diffusing clean energy technologies in Asia? Matching barriers in technology diffusion with the roles of institutions. http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/43765/InTech-What_are_the_roles_of_national_and_international_institution s_to_ overcome_barriers_in_diffusing_clean_energy_technologies_in_asia_matching_barriers_in_technology_diffusion_with_the_roles_of_institutions.pdf Retrieved from: [ Google Scholar ]
• Weitemeyer S., Kleinhans D., Vogt T., Agert C. Integration of renewable energy sources in future power systems: The role of storage. Renew. Energy. 2014; 75 :14–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weyland K. Theories of policy diffusion lessons from Latin American pension reform. World Polit. 2005; 57 (02):262–295. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang H., Li L., Zhou D., Zhou P. Political connections, government subsidies and firm financial performance: Evidence from renewable energy manufacturing in. Renew. Energy. 2014; 63 :330–336. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao Z., Chang R., Chen Y. What hinders the further development of wind power in China ? A socio-technical barrier study. Energy Policy. 2016; 88 (January):465–476. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zyadin A., Halder P., Kähkönen T., Puhakka A. Challenges to renewable energy: A bulletin of perceptions from international academic arena. Renew. Energy. 2014; 69 (September):82–88. [ Google Scholar ]

Mapping the future's sweet spot for clean energy and biodiversity

Joshua tree and kit fox study: consider future range shifts when siting clean energy.

Climate change is driving both the loss of biodiversity and the need for clean, renewable energy. It is also shifting where species are expected to live in the future. Yet these realities are rarely considered together. Where can clean energy projects be built without impacting the future habitat ranges of threatened and endangered species?

A study from the University of California, Davis, examines this question by overlaying renewable energy siting maps with the ranges of two species in the southwestern United States: the iconic and climate-vulnerable Joshua tree and federally endangered San Joaquin kit fox.

The study, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change , found that Joshua trees are expected to lose 31% of their habitat while kit foxes lose 81% by 2070. That's with climate change alone, under a moderate emissions scenario. When overlayed with existing and proposed renewable energy projects, an additional 1.7% of Joshua tree habitat and 3.9% of kit fox habitat could be lost.

"This study describes how we need to use more renewable energy to fight climate change, but it also warns us that as we expand renewable energy, we are going to overlap with biodiversity hotspots," said first author Uzma Ashraf, a postdoctoral scholar with the UC Davis Wild Energy Center and the Department of Land, Air and Water Resources. "We show how advanced computer modeling can be applied to improve our understanding of how to site renewable energy resources in ways that benefit biodiversity and their shifting ranges."

Clean energy and biodiversity

Globally, 290 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy capacity were developed in 2021. The world needs to ramp that up to 1,120 GW every year between now and 2030 to meet net zero emissions goals by 2050.

Meanwhile, animal populations have declined by two-thirds in the past 50 years, mostly due to habitat losses, which are exacerbated by climate change, the study notes.

Altering the landscape could damage places that would otherwise serve as climate refugia under future climate conditions .

San Joaquin kit foxes have been known to use solar facilities for habitat, which scientists attribute to the shade the facilities provide. The study said this suggests there may be ways to minimize impacts to the species through careful attention to its ecological needs.

Future-facing decisions

Corresponding author and Associate Professor Rebecca R. Hernandez directs the Wild Energy Center at UC Davis. She said her center is working to develop a framework to help clean energy developers make future-facing decisions on siting that consider expected range shifts of animals.

"There is a current moonshot for solar and wind energy development," Hernandez said. "It is one where the footprint of the transition takes hold fast but in a manner that reinforces goals for biodiversity conservation and social justice. Species maps are now dynamic over time under climate change. Our team uses state-of-the-art computational tools to chart a safe passage for renewables."

The study's co-authors include Toni Lynn Morelli of the U.S. Geological Survey and Adam B. Smith of the Missouri Botanical Garden's Center for Conservation and Sustainable Development.

The study was funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

• Endangered Animals
• Energy Technology
• Energy and Resources
• Energy and the Environment
• Renewable Energy
• Environmental Science
• Renewable energy
• Energy conservation
• Radiant energy
• Solar power
• Kinetic energy
• Energy development

Story Source:

Materials provided by University of California - Davis . Original written by Kat Kerlin. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Uzma Ashraf, Toni Lyn Morelli, Adam B. Smith, Rebecca R. Hernandez. Aligning renewable energy expansion with climate-driven range shifts . Nature Climate Change , 2024; DOI: 10.1038/s41558-024-01941-3

Cite This Page :

• Rock Weathering and Climate
• Fertility: Skin Cell Turned Into an Egg
• After Surgery: Alerts from Ultrasound Stickers
• Lost Tombs and Quarries Rediscovered in Cyprus
• Making Quantum Bits Fly
• Artificial Building Blocks of Life
• Making AI Act More Like a Scientist
• Lack of Focus Doesn't Equal Lack of Intelligence
• Animals: Extinction Risk Due to Climate
• Loss of Nature: High Cost