Connect with us

Energy

IEA steps up its work on energy innovation as money flows into new energy tech companies

Published

on

Investments are leading indicators of the direction of change in the energy sector. This is particularly true for investments in innovation and digitalisation, so-called “intangible assets” that will shape the technologies for supplying and using energy in the decades to come.

Across the economy, investments in long-lasting intangible assets – including software, R&D, data, management efficiency, branding – are growing and will be among the biggest sources of future productivity. In Europe, intangible investments are rising as a share of GDP, while those in more traditional, tangible capital assets are declining. In the United States, intangibles are already in the lead according to some estimates.

The International Energy Agency brings together the best global data on energy investments in its World Energy Investment report and Tracking Clean Energy Progress web platform, including investments in innovation.

Innovative energy technologies will be crucial to tackling environmental problems associated with energy use, as well as reducing consumer costs and increasing prosperity around the world. Both the public and private sectors play central roles in driving energy innovation, with private money flowing to new commercial opportunities, supported by government-backed markets that provide direction to innovative activities and government investment in novel, risky technology areas. To deliver the goals agreed by the 23 country signatories (plus the European Commission) of Mission Innovation, understanding the trends in the spending and the strategies of the private sector will be vital.

Electric mobility is leading an energy venture capital boom

The latest data on investments in start-ups from i3 shows a booming venture capital sector globally for energy technologies. Venture capital investors provide capital to multiple small companies with new ideas about how to deploy energy technologies, often combining technologies in novel ways in the hope of disrupting existing markets and delivering huge returns within five years if one of them is successful. While venture capital generally does not fund the underlying research, it is a good indicator of where people think there is scope for new technologies to meet customers’ unsatisfied needs and unseat the existing energy order.

Venture capital investment in energy technologies is flourishing, with more money flowing in 2018 than in the first two quarters of any previous year. But whereas the previous highpoint in 2008 was led by renewables – notably solar – it is now transportation that is getting all the attention, mostly electric vehicles. To complete the switch from supply-side to demand-side technologies, funding for energy efficiency (especially related to connected-buildings technology) has been higher than for renewables so far in 2018.

As we have previously noted, several factors underpin this trend. First, innovation in clean energy hardware and venture capital are often not well matched. The timeframe needed to establish the viability of energy projects can be too long, the capital requirements for technology demonstration too high and the consumer value too low. Although there is a much more established market for solar panels today, compared to 2008, there is a still a serious need to deliver better renewable technologies to the market. Secondly, while the upswing of investments is striking, the total number of deals was actually falling until this year, when it saw an 18% increase compared to the first half of 2017. What has changed is the willingness of investors – especially in Asia – to place a small number of very large bets on electric vehicle companies, which represent the hottest part of the market today.

Energy is still far from joining the ranks of biotechnology and software as a hundred-billion-dollar venture capital market. However, by combining spillovers from rapid digital technology advances with expectations of revolution in the transport system, it is currently in a growth phase. If consumers respond favourably, some of these digital and mobility ideas could be deployed at scales of millions of units relatively quickly; at such a scale new generations would be developed each year and performance improved dramatically. But is unclear whether the excitement around, for example, batteries for electric mobility could stimulate venture capital investment in electricity storage for the grid or whether venture capital will play a significant role in energy supply technology development. Markets for stored electricity are not poised to deliver such high returns in the near term and venture capital is not usually patient.

Changes and new entrants in corporate energy innovation strategy

Corporate venture capital can take a slightly more long-term view, but still more short-term than traditional corporate R&D programmes. High levels of technological uncertainty in today’s energy sector, coupled with rising competition between firms in different regions and, increasingly, different sectors, support a shift in the patterns of corporate innovation funding.

We estimate that global corporate spending on energy R&D grew 3% in 2017, to USD 88 billion, but is still lower than it was in 2014, before the oil price slumped. Over recent decades, these budgets have become less centralised and more integrated with product development in individual business units. Many major companies devote no more than one-tenth to one-third of their total R&D budgets to new technologies, with the bulk of spending going to incremental improvements of existing technologies. Given the high expectations for fundamental changes in the energy system and uncertainty about the timing and technologies involved, firms are trying to make their research budgets work as hard as possible.

Digitalisation, in particular, enables companies to place more small bets on emerging technologies and to be open to changing direction quickly. New technologies for software and digital-based products have shorter innovation cycles and can be brought to the market quicker. They require less investment and fewer consumables, and they can be prototyped more quickly and tested in a variety of environments simultaneously and do not need costly manufacturing facilities or value chains to be deployed. The result can be a lower unit cost of innovation. But it also opens energy companies up to competition from firms with core competences in information and communication technologies (ICT).

In 2017, total investment in energy technology start-ups by corporations – i.e. companies primarily engaged in making and selling non-financial products – reached USD 6.1 billion. This was a big increase compared to 2016, and was driven largely by investments by ICT companies alongside more traditional energy sector companies, including oil and gas and utilities and automakers. As with energy venture capital in general, the overall trend underpinned by several very large deals, especially in Asia. Notable deals in 2017 included Tencent and Baidu’s investments in Tesla, NIO and WM Motors; Intel’s investment in Volocoptor electric helicopters; Qualcomm’s investment in CargoX truck logistics; and China Mobile’s investment in Ninebot electric scooters.

In some cases, the entry of firms from sectors such as ICT into parts of the energy industry is forcing companies to change their perceptions of who they should consider their competitors to be.

There are several reasons large established companies provide capital to early-stage technology companies. They might see it as a good investment on a purely financial basis, but more commonly it is seen as an investment in learning about a technology, acquiring human capital, and building a relationship with the technology owner that would smooth the path to licensing or buying the technology if it is successful. In general, this approach is used with technologies that are currently outside the core competence of the corporate investor but that could add significant value to existing businesses if the market developed in that direction. Given the value of innovation to many large energy companies, corporate venture capital (CVC) finance and even growth equity (a type of private equity investment) can cost less and involve less risk than developing a technology in-house. It can also shield the developers from the strict evaluations placed on internal R&D projects housed in existing business units. For a start-up company, a CVC investor can provide access to expertise and customers that can give it a better chance of maturing quickly.

Among oil and gas companies, a noticeable recent trend is a shift away from technology areas that complement their existing infrastructure – such as bioenergy, CCUS and fossil fuel supply technologies – and towards technologies that could complement their broader capabilities or let them explore new business areas. Utilities have also increased their funding of energy technology start-ups. Worldwide, they spent a record USD 0.7 billion in 2017, surpassing the previous high of 2013 and the tail end of the clean tech boom. Solar power, electricity storage and, to a lesser extent, smart-grid technologies have been the main focus of utility funding in recent years, but growth in 2017 was driven largely by transport technologies, which took one-half of the total, and wind power technologies, which took one-quarter.

As innovation evolves, the IEA is helping policies to adapt

A growing number of energy companies are separating the teams that are focused on innovation outside their core competences, and that could in some cases undermine their existing businesses, from the governance structures of typical corporate R&D. Rather than having large budgets for research linked to sustaining existing businesses, these teams generally pursue a wider range of innovation management activities, often with lower capital requirements. These activities include VC funding, internal innovation competitions, pilot testing of competing options and more strategic partnerships with firms outside their traditional sectors. To manage risks in highly uncertain and unfamiliar technology areas, collaboration with technology suppliers, customers or across business units tends to play a larger role than in traditional corporate R&D.

Changes to the ways that new energy technologies are developed and commercialised by the private sector can require changes in the ways that governments incentivise and track innovation. Having a strong ecosystem of research institutions and energy entrepreneurs can be more valuable than tax breaks and R&D funding for making a country attractive to a large company as a place to undertake novel projects. Absolute corporate expenditure on R&D may become less closely linked to the pace of corporate innovation in low-carbon technologies. The need to collaborate to rapidly test and scale up ideas can reduce companies’ incentives to create and defend in-house intellectual property. Policy makers may need to ensure that their national or regional policies also support the improvements to capital-intensive hardware solutions needed to tackle climate change. In these areas, patient government capital for higher-risk technologies could become even more vital.

The IEA takes this public policy challenge seriously and is strengthening its work on innovation around the world. For example, on 30 September 2018, we signed a Memorandum of Understanding with India on collaboration on clean energy innovation as part of our Clean Energy Transitions Programme. We are also enhancing collaboration with Brazil and other key partner countries. Through this programme, plus our ongoing close cooperation with Mission Innovation and our leading network of Technology Collaboration Programmes, the IEA aims to support countries to have the best data and analysis on public and private sector energy R&D at their fingertips and apply international best practice in policy making.

The commentary is based on an excerpt from World Energy Investment 2018 and interviews conducted with corporate R&D leaders in late 2017 and early 2018. Source: IEA

Continue Reading
Comments

Energy

The Nuclear State without Nuclear: Nuclear Energy Tragedy pertaining Indian Regional Development

Avatar photo

Published

on

India’s national energy policy is heavily dependent on fossil fuel consumption to attain its energy demands; around 70 percent of the energy requirements are overwhelmingly met by coal, where the share of nuclear power is below 3 percent. Coal is essential for baseload in electrification, and the production of steel and significant industries thrive on coal consumption alone. In the year 2020-21, India produced 716 million tons of coal, nearly two times higher compared to 2011-12, when India produced 431 million tons to supply the ever-growing demand for power. Despite such enormous production, India is one of the largest coal importers. Not alone, the coal simultaneously India dependence on oil imports, according to reports, stood at 76 percent, which is predicted to surge up to severe levels by 2040.    

Despite the heavy reliance on fossil fuels and the fact that India maintained its carbon emissions level below (” emissions per capita, total or kWh produced”) the Paris agreement 2015 levels, meticulous analysis reveals that the carbon emission level of India has risen by 200 percent since 1990. Climate change affects the agrarian sector, which makes up about 42 percent of India’s workforce, pushing it under the blade of job cuts if the water scarcity gets severe; it also threatens the inhabitants of hilly areas whose employment is dependent on the mesmeric mountains tourism. The scope of development of any region in this modern world significantly relies on the consumption of power to run factories, lighten up houses, and fast irrigation systems in farms for large quantities of production.   

India’s current electricity distribution has 371.054 GW GRIDs, divided into five regions Northern, Eastern, Western, North Eastern, and Southern; seventeen percent of this electric GRID is exercised by the agriculture sector, where the commercial agencies use 48 percent. With the emerging depletion of fossil fuels, nuclear power adoption, along with other clean energy power sources, is considered one of the priorities of the Indian government.

However, reports depicted that those policies’ effects are not present on the ground, where nuclear energy contributes merely three percent to the total energy production. The nuclear proportion in China’s energy production is four times greater than India’s; India must adapt to the nuclearization of India’s rural area, paving the way for future growth. The recent enclosure of twenty-five-year-old coal plants in India reflects a minor contribution concerning carbon emissions reduction. At the same time, the consequence brought India into the coal crisis in the northern region.

Rural backwardness constitutes the majority due to the low electricity consumption, whose reasons are ample, sometimes due to geographical limitations and atmospheric restrictions, especially in hilly areas. The electric GRID distribution and maintenance could be better, where the electricity surplus is concentrated in a few sectors based in metro cities. During the Covid Preventive lockdown, seventy percent of power consumption drop in rural India has been noticed; this development questions India’s energy policies which heavily relied upon fossil fuels for energy production. Four states, named Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, and Madhya Pradesh, comprise 550 million tons of coal, equivalent to 75-80 percent of coal consumption. The argument in favor of coal is due to its cost-effectiveness and availability.  

Another reason for low rural development is the GRID-electrification system, being the primary source of power supply in the rural household, reported monthly energy consumption of 39 kWh, half of India’s national energy consumption average, which is a significant obstacle to the adoption of modern technology for overall growth in rural areas. The reason is not alone political but mismanagement of electricity distribution. As the question of this paper addressed, Why Nuclear? Why not other sources of non-Fossil fuels energy?   

Mathematical Evidence  

For example, the number of atoms of Uranium 235 per kilogram is 2.564×1024 releasing the energy per gram is around 2.29×104 kWh. [Dr S.N Ghosal, Nuclear Physics].  Thermal plants produce the same energy after running for 229 hours at the capacity of 1 MW. When one kilogram of coal burns, it generates 8.926 kWh after exhausting the total mass of 2.56×103 kg. The above estimates demonstrate the advantage of using uranium for power generation. 

However, the nuclear economic constraint unrevealed the enormous cost comes alongside Nuclear Power Plant projects, especially the cost of 1000 megawatts generation is around 5500 dollars, whereas natural gas provides the same quantity of energy for under 1000 dollars; the construction durations refrain policymakers to entertain the nuclear reactor as a feasible power generation source where it takes around seven years to complete and 15-16 years to breakeven.

Nuclear dependency globally was now 10 percent, peaked at 17.7 in 1996, and this is the second obstacle for nuclear energy globally. However, India’s view, contrary to the other nations, being the largest reserve of Thorium, gives an upper hand to maximize energy production by establishing thorium reactors which are undergoing the three-stage plan. Besides thorium reactors, SMRs are in consideration, especially the recent development in the USA where private firm Nu Scale advanced to develop the Small Modular Nuclear Reactor with the capacity of generating 50 Megawatts, which is not par to the level of traditional reactors but corresponds to the resilience it could provide electrifying those lands where electric GRIDs yet not connected. The rural area primarily benefits from such development as such modules are self-sustainable, where the reliance will be on water recycling, limiting water misuse.

The case of Jadugoda was an infamous case where Uranium plant radiation contributed to severe health deterioration, highlighted by Kyoto university research. Radiation is one of the critical issues alongside nuclear waste, which hinders nuclear energy’s ability to obtain massive consent, especially in rural areas.

Other Renewable sources talking about Hydropower, India has 18 pressurized heavy water reactors in operation, with another four projects launched totaling 2.8 GW capacity. India 2019 took over Japan, becoming the fifth-largest hydropower producer generating 162.10 TWh from 50 TWH installed capacity. Close to 100 hydropower currents are used, contributing around twelve percent to the total power generation. The procedure of hydropower generation emphasizes water flow tremendously; without the fast running, the water plant will be defunct and fail to produce power. This forces the policymakers to ignore the natural effects on the regions of the water flow is adequate. 

Climate change models are clear about the cascading impacts of global warming trends on the glaciers of the Himalayas, the primary source of water in the region that sustains the drainage network within the mountain chain. The current hydro onslaught in the Himalayas deliberately ignores contentious externalities such as social displacement, ecological impacts, and environmental and technological risks. In the rural areas, if the regions do not have such a large flow of water, it will discourage the policy marker from implementing it even if one state possesses water, it will obstruct the construction of such projects because of shortage of water and possibly drainage hindering to fulfill the critical water needs, especially in the Punjab region.

 Wind energy mechanical power through wind turbines as of 28 February 2021, India installed wind power capacity was 38.789 GW, the world’s fourth largest installed wind power capacity. Like hydropower, nature requires to perform its task where the wind flow determines the total power production. If a region is not naturally gifted, then feasibility is under question.

The last alternative Fossil fuel, which is heavily praised by the young generation, is solar energy. The country currently has 44.3 GW installed capacity as of 31 August 2021, where solar energy has the potential to generate electricity for rural areas and simultaneously reduce Fossil fuels consumption. The New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) expected “the total investment for upgrading to 100 GW solar power capacity cost around $94 billion. The cost-efficiency factor is a plus point of solar energy. However, the pace still needs to catch up in the quest to replace conventional sources of energy.   

The fossil fuels burned by the factories in the urban areas are the primary power contributor supplying power to the rural areas. This system heavily depends on the GRIDs vulnerable to atmospheric shifts such as storms.  

Moreover, even a minor breakdown might defuse the electricity power supply GRIDs for days, if not weeks. To tackle these issues, Portable Nuclear plants could be set up to give the villagers access to electricity without interruption. The reduction of size assists the government official in planning the safety strategy more swiftly simultaneously; cost efficiency is another factor where a policymaker can cut factory expenses.

Figure 1 GRID-level system costs for dispatch able and renewable technologies Materials requirement for various electricity generation technologies (source: US Department of Energy)

Figure 1 deciphers the cost relationship enabling us to comprehend the long-term financial cost when the connection cost among other eco-friendly energy sources is too high compared to fossil fuels. Nuclear energy outperforms all existing energy sources considered eco-friendly in connection cost and balancing cost. This development also illustrates that the factories lean more towards fossil fuels because of the low cost. However, economically speaking, the employment of such industries could be more sustainable in the long term.

The Photovoltaic, Hydro, and onshore alternatives, well-established sources of energy production, are not that reliable, and variation in power generation discourages them from being considered a superior replacement. 

Solar is affordable but unreliable because intermittency issues require storing backup, and the production depends mainly upon the sun, like the wind, for turbine energy. In contrast, coal requires man labor to extract from the mines and ignite it to produce energy if we consider the process in abstraction. The case of nuclear is different nuclear energy do rely on 239 Uranium and 242 Plutonium, in some cases 232 Thorium to attain the level where power could be generated, and uranium, to be precise, is scared in quantity to solve the enormous issue Enrico Fermi already in the 1940s, stated that nuclear reactors operating with ‘fast’ neutron are capable to fission not only the rare isotope U-235 which indicates towards A fast-neutron reactor.

The Covid and Rural development     

During the lockdown, seventy percent of the power consumption drop in rural India has been noticed; this development questions India’s energy policies which heavily relied upon fossil fuels for energy production. The GRID-electrification, the primary source of power supply in the rural household, reported monthly energy consumption of 39 kWh half of India’s national energy consumption average, which is a significant obstacle to the adoption of modern technology for overall growth in rural areas. A significant downfall has been noticed in the employment sector, tabled whether it could replace fossil fuel, which constitutes a significant number in employing rural workers. 

Deloitte’s study of the European nuclear industry suggested that nuclear provides more jobs per TWh of electricity generated than any other clean energy source. According to the report, the nuclear industry sustains more than 1.1 million jobs in the European Union. Aggressive promotion of nuclear energy will impact all other fields, such as education, the health sector, and employment. Running a conventional reactor requires a team who can resolve the complex task; however, if the reactor is small and portable, the operation fixations reduce significantly. 

Providing adequate function training will become the source of employment while reducing fissile fuel dependency. At the same time, nuclear reactors require sophisticated hands to run the function, which could reduce the unemployment created by fossil fuel industries in response to a carbon tax or depletion of fuels, more precisely, a severe rise in fuel prices.    

The Limits    

Although the enormous potential for nuclear energy possesses few areas that are still vulnerable whose exploitation might invite catastrophic such as the illegal transfer of nuclear energy by non-state actors, one of the critical issues India is facing is news of uranium confiscations currently haunts the world that India security vulnerability enabled the private persons to have a hand over fissile materials, the other issue that should be considered is the maintenance of nuclear plants Chornobyl is an excellent example of what extend of potential a nuclear disaster possesses still in several regions in Ukraine radiation exist. [Barry W. Brook, “Why nuclear energy is sustainable and has to be part of the energy mix”].

India needs to accelerate the nuclear problem while strictly abiding by the security norms of the nuclear policy widely accepted as a nuclear safety benchmark. Meltdown, Hazardous nuclear waste and maintenance predominated the circle of nuclear crisis (except France and Sweden, as a significant proportion of electricity generation depends on nuclear plants); currently, SMR is echoing to minimize such externalities; however, the effectiveness of such small module reactors must be scrutinized under tests before it could be considered as a genuine alternative to traditional reactors.

Conclusion   

Nuclear energy is far superior to other fossil fuel energy alternatives. However, the low adaption is one of the critical issues that require tackling by incentivizing the research to develop several small scales portable nuclear reactor modules that stand on the international security parameters and simultaneously ensure a low probability of accidents. The employment prospect from nuclear reactors is enormous, and as the depletion of fossil fuel takes place could become the most employment service-providing sector.

 Two types of reactors are mainly highlighted first is a conventional nuclear reactor, and the second is portable nuclear reactors; government, in the long term, must concentrate on building small-scale reactors so cost efficiency will favor the rural people. Nuclear energy is a multi-sectoral project where the industries and the household will have greater access to electricity, but the complexity of reactor management advances specialization in education. Such problems are vital if India has any dream of total nuclearization.

Continue Reading

Energy

Azerbaijan seeks to become the green energy supplier of the EU

Avatar photo

Published

on

image source: azernews

Recently, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Hungary and Romania signed an agreement to build a strategic partnership regarding green energy.   According to the document of the text, these four countries will be working together to develop a 1,195 kilometer submarine power cable underneath the Black Sea, thus effectively creating an energy transmission corridor from Azerbaijan via Georgia to Romania and Hungary.   For Europe, this is a golden opportunity that must be seized upon.

According to the International Monetary Fund, “Europe’s energy systems face an unprecedented crisis. Supplies of Russian gas—critical for heating, industrial processes and power—have been cut by more than 80 percent this year.  Wholesale prices of electricity and gas have surged as much as 15-fold since early 2021, with severe effects for households and businesses.  The problem could well worsen.” 

For this reason, Europe should switch as soon as possible to green energy supplies, so that they will rely less upon Russian gas and oil in the wake of the Ukraine crisis.   This will enable Europe to be energy independent and to fulfill its energy needs by relying upon better strategic partners, such as Azerbaijan, who are not hostile to Europe’s national security and the West more generally.  

By having this submarine power cable underneath the Black Sea, Azerbaijan can supply not only Hungary and Romania with green energy, but the rest of Europe as well if the project is expanded.   Israel, as a world leader in renewable energy, can also play a role in helping Azerbaijan become the green energy supplier of the EU, as the whole project requires Azerbaijan to obtain increased energy transmission infrastructure.  Israel can help Azerbaijan obtain this energy transmission infrastructure, so that Azerbaijan can become Europe’s green energy supplier.    

According to the Arava Institute of the Environment, “Israel, with its abundant renewable energy potential, in particular wind and solar, has excellent preconditions to embark on the pathway towards a 100% renewable energy system. Accordingly, Israel has already made considerable progress with regard to the development of renewable energy capacities.”   The Israeli government has been pushing hard for a clean Israeli energy sector by 2030.   Thus, Israel has the technical know-how needed to help Azerbaijan obtain the infrastructure that it needs to become the green energy supplier of Europe following the crisis in the Ukraine.

Given the environmental conditions present in Azerbaijan, which has an abundance of access to both solar and wind power, with Israeli technical assistance, Azerbaijan can help green energy be transported through pipelines and tankers throughout all of Europe, thus helping to end the energy crisis in the continent.   In recent years, Europe has sought to shift away from oil and gas towards more sustainable energy.     

With this recent agreement alongside other European policies, these efforts are starting to bear fruits.   In 2021, more than 22% of the gross final energy consumed in Europe came from renewable energy.   However, different parts of Europe have varying levels of success.   For example, Sweden meets 60% of its energy needs via renewable energy, but Hungary only manages to utilize renewable energy between 10% and 15% of the time.    Nevertheless, it is hoped that with this new submarine power cable underneath the Black Sea, these statistics will start to improve across the European Union and this will enable Europe to obtain true energy independence, free of Russian hegemony.  

Continue Reading

Energy

Energy Technology Perspectives 2023: Opportunities and emerging risks

Avatar photo

Published

on

The energy world is at the dawn of a new industrial age – the age of clean energy technology manufacturing – that is creating major new markets and millions of jobs but also raising new risks, prompting countries across the globe to devise industrial strategies to secure their place in the new global energy economy, according to a major new IEA report.

Energy Technology Perspectives 2023, the latest instalment in one of the IEA’s flagship series, serves as the world’s first global guidebook for the clean technology industries of the future. It provides a comprehensive analysis of global manufacturing of clean energy technologies today – such as solar panels, wind turbines, EV batteries, electrolysers for hydrogen and heat pumps – and their supply chains around the world, as well as mapping out how they are likely to evolve as the clean energy transition advances in the years ahead.

The analysis shows the global market for key mass-manufactured clean energy technologies will be worth around USD 650 billion a year by 2030 – more than three times today’s level – if countries worldwide fully implement their announced energy and climate pledges. The related clean energy manufacturing jobs would more than double from 6 million today to nearly 14 million by 2030 – and further rapid industrial and employment growth is expected in the following decades as transitions progress.

At the same time, the current supply chains of clean energy technologies present risks in the form of high geographic concentrations of resource mining and processing as well as technology manufacturing. For technologies like solar panels, wind, EV batteries, electrolysers and heat pumps, the three largest producer countries account for at least 70% of manufacturing capacity for each technology – with China dominant in all of them. Meanwhile, a great deal of the mining for critical minerals is concentrated in a small number of countries. For example, the Democratic Republic of Congo produces over 70% of the world’s cobalt, and just three countries – Australia, Chile and China – account for more than 90% of global lithium production.

The world is already seeing the risks of tight supply chains, which have pushed up clean energy technology prices in recent years, making countries’ clean energy transitions more difficult and costly. Increasing prices for cobalt, lithium and nickel led to the first ever rise in EV battery prices, which jumped by nearly 10% globally in 2022. The cost of wind turbines outside China has also been rising after years of declines, and similar trends can be seen in solar PV.

“The IEA highlighted almost two years ago that a new global energy economy was emerging rapidly. Today, it has become a central pillar of economic strategy and every country needs to identify how it can benefit from the opportunities and navigate the challenges. We’re talking about new clean energy technology markets worth hundreds of billions of dollars as well as millions of new jobs,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. “The encouraging news is the global project pipeline for clean energy technology manufacturing is large and growing. If everything announced as of today gets built, the investment flowing into manufacturing clean energy technologies would provide two-thirds of what is needed in a pathway to net zero emissions. The current momentum is moving us closer to meeting our international energy and climate goals – and there is almost certainly more to come.”

“At the same time, the world would benefit from more diversified clean technology supply chains,” Dr Birol added. “As we have seen with Europe’s reliance on Russian gas, when you depend too much on one company, one country or one trade route – you risk paying a heavy price if there is disruption. So, I’m pleased to see many economies around the world competing today to be leaders in the new energy economy and drive an expansion of clean technology manufacturing in the race to net zero. It’s important, though, that this competition is fair – and that there is a healthy degree of international collaboration, since no country is an energy island and energy transitions will be more costly and slow if countries do not work together.”

The report notes that major economies are acting to combine their climate, energy security and industrial policies into broader strategies for their economies. The Inflation Reduction Act in the United States is a clear example of this, but there is also the Fit for 55 package and REPowerEU plan in the European Union, Japan’s Green Transformation programme, and the Production Linked Incentive scheme in India that encourages manufacturing of solar PV and batteries – and China is working to meet and even exceed the goals of its latest Five-Year Plan.

Meanwhile, clean energy project developers and investors are watching closely for the policies that can give them a competitive edge. Relatively short lead times of around 1-3 years on average to bring manufacturing facilities online mean that the project pipeline can expand rapidly in an environment that is conducive to investment. Only 25% of the announced manufacturing projects globally for solar PV are under construction or beginning construction imminently, according to the report. The number is around 35% for EV batteries and less than 10% for electrolysers. Government policies and market developments can have a significant effect on where the rest of these projects end up.

Amid the regional ambitions for scaling up manufacturing, ETP-2023 underscores the important role of international trade in clean energy technology supply chains. It shows that nearly 60% of solar PV modules produced worldwide are traded across borders. Trade is also important for EV batteries and wind turbine components, despite their bulkiness, with China the main net exporter today.

The report also highlights the specific challenges related to the critical minerals needed for many clean energy technologies, noting the long lead times for developing new mines and the need for strong environmental, social and governance standards. Given the uneven geographic distribution of critical mineral resources, international collaboration and strategic partnerships will be crucial for ensuring security of supply.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending