ENERGY TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION POLICY
Winter 2010-11
"How Good Politics Results in Bad Policy: The Case of Biofuel Mandates"
Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter
By Amanda Sardonis, Assistant Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program
The biofuels industry has become big policy, big business, and increasingly controversial. While countries like the United States and Brazil use biofuels to support farmers, increase energy security (reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil), improve the environment, and increase economic independence by reducing the need for foreign oil, environmentalists challenge the assertion that biofuels, particularly corn ethanol, offer a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Winter 2010-11
"Featured Fellow: Charles (Skuk) Jones"
Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter
By Lucia Cordon and Charles Jones, Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
Charles (Skuk) Jones is a research fellow with the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration and Deployment Policy project (ERD3) of the Belfer Center's Energy Technology Innovation Policy (ETIP) research group. He researches financing of alternative energy innovation.
Winter 2010-11
"Transportation Revenue Options: Infrastructure, Emissions, and Congestion"
Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter
By Amanda Sardonis, Assistant Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program
This recent discussion paper from the Energy Technology Innovation Policy (ETIP) research group is a summary of discussions from the Belfer Center's May 2010 workshop "Transportation Revenue Options," which brought together 27 transportation experts for a two-day workshop to discuss revenue-generating options.
Photo by Stuart Darsch
October 29, 2010
At MIT, Holdren Issues Call for Action on Climate Disruption
News
By James F. Smith, Communications Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
John P. Holdren, President Obama's chief science and technology advisor, draws a grim picture of our world at the end of this century if we fail to start slashing greenhouse gas emissions that are ravaging the global climate. In a lecture at MIT, Holdren issued a call to action, arguing for a package of integrated measures to protect the environment. Holdren is on leave from Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center, where he was director of the Science and Technology Public Policy program.
AP Photo
October 2010
"Water Consumption of Energy Resource Extraction, Processing, and Conversion"
Discussion Paper
By Erik Mielke, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2010–2011, Laura Diaz Anadon, Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Director, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy 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 paper provides an overview of water consumption for different sources of energy, including extraction, processing, and conversion of resources, fuels, and technologies. The primary focus of this paper is to summarize the consumptive use of water for different sources of energy. Where appropriate, levels of water withdrawals are also discussed, especially in the context of cooling of thermoelectric power plants.
October 2010
"Analysis of Financial Incentives for Early CCS Deployment"
Discussion Paper
By Mohammed Al-Juaied, Former Visiting Scholar, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2008–2009
This paper looks at ten different forms of public support for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies including investment tax credits, accelerated depreciation, production tax credits, loan guarantees, capital grants, allowance allocations, and storage tax credits. The paper compares the cost reduction potential of each option against a conventional coal-to-electricity facility without CCS.
AP Photo
September 28, 2010
"Expert Elicitation of Cost, Performance, and RD&D Budgets for Coal Power with CCS"
Paper
By Gabe Chan, Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Laura Diaz Anadon, Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Director, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Melissa Chan, Former Research Fellow, Energy Research, Development, Demonstration & Deployment Policy Project, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, January 2009–December 2010 and Audrey Lee, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2009–2011
There is uncertainty about the ex-ante returns to research, development, and demonstration programs in the United States on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. To quantify this uncertainty, we conducted a written expert elicitation of thirteen experts in fossil power and CCS technologies from the government, academia, and the private sector. We asked experts to provide their recommended budget and allocation of RD&D funds by specific fossil power and CCS technology and type of RD&D activity (i.e. basic research, applied research, pilot plants, and demonstration plants) for the United States....On average, experts estimated that if their recommended RD&D portfolio was implemented, the capital cost of new coal plants with CCS in 2030 would decrease by 10% in addition to the cost reductions/increases that would occur by 2030 through non-public RD&D related factors.
AP Photo
July 27, 2010
"The Power of Cap-and-Trade"
Op-Ed, Boston Globe
By Richard Schmalensee and Robert N. Stavins, Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government; Member of the Board; Director, Harvard Project on Climate Agreements
"A price on carbon is the least costly way to provide meaningful incentives for technology innovation and diffusion, reduce emissions from fossil fuels, and drive energy efficiency. In the long run, it can reduce our use of oil and drive our transportation system toward alternative energy sources."
Belfer Center Photo
Summer 2010
Ruud Kempener Builds International Cooperation on Energy Policy
Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter
By Lucia Cordon
Ruud Kempener is a postdoctoral research fellow in the Belfer Center's Energy Research, Development, Demonstration & Deployment (ERD3) Policy project.
April 2010
DOE FY 2011 Budget Request for Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment: Analysis and Recommendations
Report
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.
