ACADEMIC PAPERS & REPORTS
April 2010
DOE FY 2011 Budget Request for Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment: Analysis and Recommendations
By Laura Diaz Anadon, Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Director, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Matthew Bunn, Associate Professor of Public Policy; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom, Gabe Chan, Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Melissa Chan, Former Research Fellow, Energy Research, Development, Demonstration & Deployment Policy Project, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, January 2009–December 2010, Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Charles Jones, Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Ruud Kempener, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2009–2011, Audrey Lee, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2009–2011 and Venkatesh "Venky" Narayanamurti, Benjamin Peirce Professor of Technology and Public Policy; Professor of Physics, Harvard; Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Co-Principal Investigator, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
This analysis provides an overview the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2011 energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment (ERD3) budget proposals, and lays out actionable recommendations to strengthen the effort. Overall, the report concludes that the 7 percent requested increase in applied energy research, development, and demonstration funds, while welcome in a time of budget stringency, remains well short of the sustained investment likely to be needed to meet the energy demands of the 21st century.
AP Photo
March 2010
"Analysis of Policies to Reduce Oil Consumption and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions from the US Transportation Sector"
Energy Policy, issue 3, volume 38
By W. Ross Morrow, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2008–2009, Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Gustavo Collantes, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group/Enviroment and Natural Resources Program, 2007-2008 and Henry Lee, Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program
Even as the US debates an economy-wide CO2 cap-and-trade policy the transportation sector remains a significant oil security and climate change concern. Transportation alone consumes the majority of the US's imported oil and produces a third of total US Greenhouse-Gas (GHG) emissions. This study examines different sector-specific policy scenarios for reducing GHG emissions and oil consumption in the US transportation sector under economy-wide CO2 prices.
AP Photo
February 2010
"Analysis of Policies to Reduce Oil Consumption and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions from the U.S. Transportation Sector"
By W. Ross Morrow, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2008–2009, Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Gustavo Collantes, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group/Enviroment and Natural Resources Program, 2007-2008 and Henry Lee, Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation will be a much bigger challenge than conventional wisdom assumes — requiring substantially higher fuel prices combined with more stringent regulation. This paper finds that reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector 14% below 2005 levels by 2020 may require gas prices greater than $7/gallon by 2020. It also finds that while relying on subsidies for electric or hybrid vehicles is politically seductive, it is ineffective and extremely expensive.
AP Photo
December 2009
"Key Opportunities for U.S.-China Cooperation on Coal and CCS"
By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
This paper outlines the current situation regarding advanced coal and carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the United States and China. The strategic interest in cooperation on coal and CCS is explored, and then three options for collaboration are identified and discussed. None of the options are mutually exclusive. Remaining questions for discussion are provided at the end.
AP Photo
January 2010
"Catalyzing Strategic Transformation to a Low-carbon Economy: A CCS Roadmap for China"
Energy Policy, issue 1, volume 38
By Hengwei Liu, Former Associate, and Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2008-2010 and Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
China now faces the three hard truths of thirsting for more oil, relying heavily on coal, and ranking first in global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Given these truths, two key questions must be addressed to develop a low-carbon economy: how to use coal in a carbon-constrained future? How to increase domestic oil supply to enhance energy security? Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) may be a technological solution that can deal with today's energy and environmental needs while enabling China to move closer to a low-carbon energy future. This paper has been developed to propose a possible CCS roadmap for China.
Photo Courtesy of NIST
December 2009
"Towards a Culture of Application: Science and Decision Making at the National Institute of Standards & Technology"
Minerva, issue 4, volume 47
By Nathaniel Logar, Associate, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program/Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
How does the research performed by a government mission agency contribute to useable technologies for its constituents? Is it possible to incorporate science policy mechanisms for increasing benefits to users in the decision process? The United States National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) promises research directed towards industrial application. This paper considers the processes that produce science and technology at NIST.
AP Photo
Fall 2009
"Energy for Change: Introduction to the Special Issue on Energy & Climate Change"
Innovations, issue 4, volume 4
By John P. Holdren, Former Director and Faculty Chair, Science, Technology and Public Policy Program
"Without energy, there is no economy. Without climate, there is no environment. Without economy and environment, there is no material well-being, no civil society, no personal or national security. The overriding problem associated with these realities, of course, is that the world has long been getting most of the energy its economies need from fossil fuels whose emissions are imperiling the climate that its environment needs."
November 2009
"Breaking the Climate Impasse with China: A Global Solution"
By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
A "deal" is proposed in this paper, whereby all major-emitting countries, including the United States and China, agree to reduce emissions through implementation of significant, mutually agreeable, domestic emission-reduction policies. To resolve the competitiveness and equity concerns, a proposed Carbon Mitigation Fund would be created. This proposed fund is contrasted with other existing and proposed mitigation funds and finance mechanisms.
AP Photo
November 2009
"China's Fuel Economy Standards for Passenger Vehicles: Rationale, Policy Process, and Impacts"
Energy Policy, issue 11, volume 37
By Hongyan He Oliver, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2004-2009, Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Donglian Tian and Jinhua Zhang
"China issued its first Fuel Economy Standards (FES) for light-duty passenger vehicles (LDPV) in September 2004, and the first and second phases of the FES took effective in July 2005 and January 2008, respectively. The stringency of the Chinese FES ranks third globally, following the Japanese and European standards....The Chinese experience is highly relevant for countries that are also experiencing or anticipating rapid growth in personal vehicles, those wishing to moderate an increase in oil demand, or those desirous of vehicle technology upgrades."
AP Photo
2009
"Sectoral Approaches for a Post-2012 Climate Regime: A Taxonomy"
Climate Policy, issue 6, volume 9
By Jonas Meckling, Former Research Fellow, Geopolitics of Energy Project, 2010–2012; Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, 2009–2010; Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2007–2009 and Gu Yoon Chung
Sectoral approaches have been gaining currency in the international climate debate as a possible remedy to the shortfalls of the Kyoto Protocol. Proponents argue that a sector-based architecture can more easily invite the participation of developing countries, address competitiveness issues, and enable immediate emissions reductions. However, given the numerous proposals, much confusion remains as to what sectoral approaches actually are. This article provides a simple, yet comprehensive, taxonomy of the various proposals for sectoral approaches.
