Expert elicitation survey predicts 37% to 49% declines in wind energy costs by 2050
Source abstract
Abstract
Wind energy has experienced accelerated cost reduction over the past five years—far greater than predicted in a 2015 expert elicitation. Here we report results from a new survey on wind costs, compare those with previous results and discuss the accuracy of the earlier predictions. We show that experts in 2020 expect future onshore and offshore wind costs to decline 37–49% by 2050, resulting in costs 50% lower than predicted in 2015. This is due to cost reductions witnessed over the past five years and expected continued advancements. If realized, these costs might allow wind to play a larger role in energy supply than previously anticipated. Considering both surveys, we also conclude that there is considerable uncertainty about future costs. Our results illustrate the importance of considering cost uncertainty, highlight the value and limits of using experts to reveal those uncertainties, and yield possible lessons for energy modellers and expert elicitation. Costs of renewable energy generation have fallen rapidly in recent years, often faster than predicted. Wiser et al. undertake an expert elicitation survey to project wind power costs to 2050, finding substantial continued cost reductions, and compare back to a previous survey to understand what has changed.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Wind Energy Research and Development · Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy · Integrated Energy Systems Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (61)
Show source-provided references
1. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis–Version 14.0 (Lazard, 2020).
2. Barthelmie, R. J. & Pryor, S. C. Potential contribution of wind energy to climate change mitigation. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 684–688 (2014).10.1038/nclimate2269 ↗
3. Luderer, G. et al. Assessment of wind and solar power in global low-carbon energy scenarios: an introduction. Energy Econ. 64, 542–551 (2017).10.1016/j.eneco.2017.03.027 ↗
4. Pietzcker, R. C. et al. System integration of wind and solar power in integrated assessment models: a cross-model evaluation of new approaches. Energy Econ. 64, 583–599 (2017).10.1016/j.eneco.2016.11.018 ↗
5. Bistline, J. E. et al. Electric sector policy, technological change, and U.S. emissions reductions goals: results from the EMF 32 model intercomparison project. Energy Econ. 73, 307–325 (2018).10.1016/j.eneco.2018.04.012 ↗
6. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2019 (IRENA, 2020).
7. Duffy, A. et al. Land-based wind energy cost trends in Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and the United States. Appl. Energy 277, 114777 (2020).10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114777 ↗
8. Jansen, M. et al. Offshore wind competitiveness in mature markets without subsidy. Nat. Energy 5, 614–622 (2020).10.1038/s41560-020-0661-2 ↗
9. Veers, P. et al. Grand challenges in the science of wind energy. Science 366, eaau2027 (2019).10.1126/science.aau2027 ↗
10. Watson, S. et al. Future emerging technologies in the wind power sector: a European perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 113, 109270 (2019).10.1016/j.rser.2019.109270 ↗
11. Zhang, X., Ma, C., Song, X., Zhou, Y. & Chen, W. The impacts of wind technology advancement on future global energy. Appl. Energy 184, 1033–1037 (2016).10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.04.029 ↗
12. Mai, T. T., Lantz, E. J., Mowers, M. & Wiser, R. The Value of Wind Technology Innovation: Implications for the U.S. Power System, Wind Industry, Electricity Consumers, and Environment (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2017).10.2172/1395231 ↗
13. Bistline, J. E. T. & Young, D. T. Economic drivers of wind and solar penetration in the US. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 124001 (2019).10.1088/1748-9326/ab4e2d ↗
14. Cranmer, A. & Baker, E. The global climate value of offshore wind energy. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 054003 (2020).10.1088/1748-9326/ab7667 ↗
15. Morgan, M. G. Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7176–7184 (2014).10.1073/pnas.1319946111 ↗
16. Anadón, L. D., Baker, E. & Bosetti, V. Integrating uncertainty into public energy research and development decisions. Nat. Energy 2, 1–14 (2017).
17. Morgan, M. G. & Henrion, M. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990).10.1017/CBO9780511840609 ↗
18. Cooke, R. Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science (Oxford Univ. Press, 1991).10.1093/oso/9780195064650.001.0001 ↗
19. O’Hagan, A. et al. Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Experts’ Probabilities (Wiley, 2006).10.1002/0470033312 ↗
20. Meyer, M. A. & Booker, J. M. Eliciting and Analyzing Expert Judgment: A Practical Guide (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics and American Statistical Association, 2001).10.1137/1.9780898718485 ↗
21. Hora, S. C. in Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations to Applications (eds Edwards, W. et al.) 129–153 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).10.1017/CBO9780511611308.009 ↗
22. Verdolini, E., Anadón, L. D., Baker, E., Bosetti, V. & Aleluia Reis, L. Future prospects for energy technologies: insights from expert elicitations. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 12, 133–153 (2018).10.1093/reep/rex028 ↗
23. Junginger, M. & Louwen, A. Technological Learning in the Transition to a Low-Carbon Energy System (Academic, 2020).
24. Samadi, S. The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies—a literature review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82, 2346–2364 (2018).10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.077 ↗
25. Malhotra, A. & Schmidt, T. S. Accelerating low-carbon innovation. Joule 4, 2259–2267 (2020).10.1016/j.joule.2020.09.004 ↗
26. Bolinger, M. et al. Opportunities for and challenges to further reductions in the “specific power” rating of wind turbines installed in the United States. Wind Eng. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309524X19901012 (2020).10.1177/0309524X19901012 ↗
27. Wiser, R. et al. Expert elicitation survey on future wind energy costs. Nat. Energy 1, 16135 (2016).10.1038/nenergy.2016.135 ↗
28. Bonaccorsi, A., Apreda, R. & Fantoni, G. Expert biases in technology foresight. Why they are a problem and how to mitigate them. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 151, 119855 (2020).10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119855 ↗
29. Colson, A. R. & Cooke, R. M. Expert elicitation: using the classical model to validate experts’ judgments. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 12, 113–132 (2018).10.1093/reep/rex022 ↗
30. Edenhofer, O. et al. On the economics of renewable energy sources. Energy Econ. 40, S12–S23 (2013).10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.015 ↗
31. Wiser, R. et al. Wind Energy Technology Data Update: 2020 Edition (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2020).
32. Egli, F., Steffen, B. & Schmidt, T. S. A dynamic analysis of financing conditions for renewable energy technologies. Nat. Energy 3, 1084–1092 (2018).10.1038/s41560-018-0277-y ↗
33. Steffen, B. Estimating the cost of capital for renewable energy projects. Energy Econ. 88, 104783 (2020).10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104783 ↗
34. Rohrig, K. et al. Powering the 21st century by wind energy—options, facts, figures. Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 031303 (2019).10.1063/1.5089877 ↗
35. Vieira, M., Snyder, B., Henriques, E. & Reis, L. European offshore wind capital cost trends up to 2020. Energy Policy 129, 1364–1371 (2019).10.1016/j.enpol.2019.03.036 ↗
36. Wind Energy in Europe in 2019: Trends and Statistics (WindEurope, 2020).
37. Musial, W. et al. 2019 Offshore Wind Technology Data Update (NREL, 2020).10.2172/1677477 ↗
38. Voormolen, J. A., Junginger, H. M. & van Sark, W. G. J. H. M. Unravelling historical cost developments of offshore wind energy in Europe. Energy Policy 88, 435–444 (2016).10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.047 ↗
39. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017 (IRENA, 2018).
40. Williams, E., Hittinger, E., Carvalho, R. & Williams, R. Wind power costs expected to decrease due to technological progress. Energy Policy 106, 427–435 (2017).10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.032 ↗
41. World Energy Outlook (IEA, 2020).
42. International Energy Outlook 2019 (EIA, 2019).
43. New Energy Outlook 2020 (BloombergNEF, 2020).
44. Energy Transition Outlook 2020 (DNV GL, 2020).
45. Global Renewables Outlook: Energy Transformation 2050 (IRENA, 2020).
46. Annual Energy Outlook 2020 (EIA, 2020).
47. 1H 2020 LCOE Update (BloombergNEF, 2020).
48. 2020 Annual Technology Baseline (NREL, 2020).
49. Yang, S., Lassen, S. & Kragelund, R. Global Bottom-Fixed Offshore Wind LCOE (Wood Mackenzie, 2019).
50. Wiser, R. & Bolinger, M. Benchmarking Anticipated Wind Project Lifetimes: Results from a Survey of U.S. Wind Industry Professionals (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2019).10.2172/1564078 ↗
51. Steffen, B., Beuse, M., Tautorat, P. & Schmidt, T. S. Experience curves for operations and maintenance costs of renewable energy technologies. Joule 4, 359–375 (2020).10.1016/j.joule.2019.11.012 ↗
52. Wiser, R., Bolinger, M. & Lantz, E. Assessing wind power operating costs in the United States: results from a survey of wind industry experts. Renew. Energy Focus 30, 46–57 (2019).10.1016/j.ref.2019.05.003 ↗
53. Hirth, L. & Müller, S. System-friendly wind power: how advanced wind turbine design can increase the economic value of electricity generated through wind power. Energy Econ. 56, 51–63 (2016).10.1016/j.eneco.2016.02.016 ↗
54. Wiser, R., Millstein, D., Bolinger, M., Jeong, S. & Mills, A. The hidden value of large-rotor, tall-tower wind turbines in the United States. Wind Eng. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309524X20933949 (2020).10.1177/0309524X20933949 ↗
55. Gorman, W. et al. Motivations and options for deploying hybrid generator-plus-battery projects within the bulk power system. Electr. J. 33, 106739 (2020).10.1016/j.tej.2020.106739 ↗
56. Das, S., Hittinger, E. & Williams, E. Learning is not enough: diminishing marginal revenues and increasing abatement costs of wind and solar. Renew. Energy 156, 634–644 (2020).10.1016/j.renene.2020.03.082 ↗
57. McKenna, R., Ostman v.d. Leye, P. & Fichtner, W. Key challenges and prospects for large wind turbines. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev. 53, 1212–1221 (2016).10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.080 ↗
58. Gorman, W., Mills, A. & Wiser, R. Improving estimates of transmission capital costs for utility-scale wind and solar projects to inform renewable energy policy. Energy Policy 135, 110994 (2019).10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110994 ↗
59. Rand, J. & Hoen, B. Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: what have we learned? Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 29, 135–148 (2017).10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.019 ↗
60. Schuster, E., Bulling, L. & Köppel, J. Consolidating the state of knowledge: a synoptical review of wind energy’s wildlife effects. Environ. Manage. 56, 300–331 (2015).10.1007/s00267-015-0501-5 ↗
61. Wiser, R. et al. Expert Predictions about the Future Cost of Onshore and Offshore Wind Energy (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2021).