Malte Schwoon Learning-by-doing, Learning Spillovers and the Diffusion of Fuel Cell Vehicles Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change Centre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences University of Hamburg International Max Planck Research School on EARTH SYSTEM MODELLING Presentation at the International Conference on Computational Management Science May 17-18, 2006, Amsterdam
Malte Schwoon. University of Hamburg. International Max Planck Research School on EARTH SYSTEM MODELLING. Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change. Centre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences. Learning-by-doing, Learning Spillovers and the Diffusion of Fuel Cell Vehicles. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Malte Schwoon
Learning-by-doing, Learning Spillovers and the Diffusion of
Fuel Cell Vehicles
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences
University of Hamburg
International Max Planck Research School onEARTH SYSTEM MODELLING
Presentation at theInternational Conference on Computational Management ScienceMay 17-18, 2006, Amsterdam
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 22
Introduction Why fuel cell vehicles (FCVs)?Agent based technology diffusion model
Learning by doing (LBD) in fuel cell technologiesLBD in energy technologiesCalibration/scenariosDiffusion of FCVs depends on learning rate
Learning spilloversIncrease speed of diffusionAsymmetric impact on car producers
Conclusion
Outline
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 33
Why FCVs?
No local emissions, low noiseLong term potential: Individual transport with low CO2 emissions (depending on energy mix of hydrogen production)Reduced dependency on oil New design options (low floor, low center of gravity)
Introduction
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 44
• Fuel: CGH2 • 100 kWe PEMFC (Honda)• 80 kW front + 2x 25 kW rear • Regenerative braking• Range > 500 km• Max speed: 160 km/h (limited)
Honda FCX (2005)
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 55
Can we switch to an H2-economy?(1) Technological problems basically solved (RECENTLY!) :
Fuel cell technology, H2-on-board storage, etc.
We will never switch!
We can switch soon!
The - problem of H2-infrastructure
(2) Economic start up problem for large scale introduction:
No H2-infrastructure nobody buys FCV
Nobody buys FCV no H2-infrastructure
Introduction
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 66
or vice versa
Introduction
Scenarios/Projections of the diffusion of FCVs and/or H2-infrastructure:Schlecht (2003), Thomas et al. (1998), Moore and Raman (1998), Ogden (1999, 2002), Stromberger (2003), Mercuri et al. (2002), Sørensen et al. (2004), Oi and Wada (2004), Hart (2005), etc.
Common approach1. Develop scenarios of the number of hydrogen vehicles 2. Derive implied H2-demand/H2-infrastructureImplied assumption: smooth and successful introduction of both technologies
Studies ignore dynamic interactionsTechnology driven studies ignore impact on producers/consumers
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 77
Introduction
Tax
Filling station owners:Increase share of stations with H2-outlet
Government: Sets taxes and increases number of H2-outlets
Producers:Production and price decisions
Consumers:Buying decisions
Credit availability
Producers capital
R&D funds
Investment decisions
Market sales
Profits
Savings
Car characteristics
(Expected) LBD cost reductions
Refueling worries
Driving patterns
Neighbors
Kwasnicki (1996)Janssen and Jager (2002)
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 88
Learning by doing
Electric Technologies in EU, 1980-1995
Source: Wene (2000)
Progress ratio
Learning rate = 1 – Progress ratio
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 99
Learning by doing
Energy technologies (25 obs.)
Various industries (>100 obs.)
Observed learning rates
McDonald and Schrattenholzer (2001) Dutton and Thomas (1984)
Learning rate for fuel cell technologies?
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 1010
Calibration/scenario
Central case parameterization
German compact car segment (1 mio sales per year)
- 12 producers
- 6400 different “representative” consumers
Initial fuel cell cost of 13000€ per unit
for (mass) production of 1000 units
Learning rate (LR) 15% (sens. 10-20%)
Fuel cell cost Internal combustion engine
5% tax increase every year (tax 40%)
Introduction
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 1111
Learning by doing
Percentage share of FCVs within newly registered cars in the German compact car segment
Change of NPV of profits (2010-2030)relative to “no spillover” case
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 1515
Conclusion
Hydrogen/FCV individual transport system: Technological option, but requires governmental commitment
Multi-agent simulation model helps understanding of dynamics (Standard sim-problems apply: parameters, functional forms, random events…) Modeling results High learning rates
High spilloversHigh spillovers 2nd/3rd mover advantage
Spillover policies? Environmentally concerned government:“High spillover policy” fast diffusion Asymmetric impact on producers Resistance/appreciation of producers depends on their position in the switching-chain
fast diffusion
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 1616
Thank you!
Research Unit Sustainability and Global ChangeCentre for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 1717
Learning by doing
Percentage share of FCVs within newly registered cars: Different lengths of the producers' decision horizons
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030Year
Time horizon 5 years Time horizon 4 yearsTime horizon 3 years Time horizon 2 yearsTime horizon 1 year