• Please log in or register to access this feature.

Advanced Review

You have free access to this content

Long-term energy models: Principles, characteristics, focus, and limitations

  1. Maurizio Gargiulo,
  2. Brian Ó Gallachóir*

Article first published online: 8 JAN 2013

DOI: 10.1002/wene.62

Issue

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment

Volume 2, Issue 2, pages 158–177, March/April 2013

Additional Information

How to Cite

Gargiulo, M. and Gallachóir, B. Ó. (2013), Long-term energy models: Principles, characteristics, focus, and limitations. WIREs Energy Environ., 2: 158–177. doi: 10.1002/wene.62

Author Information

  1. Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

*Correspondence to: b.ogallachoir@ucc.ie

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 12 FEB 2013
  2. Article first published online: 8 JAN 2013

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (207K)

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Böhringer C. The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down in energy policy modeling. Energy Econ 1998, 20:233–248.
  • 2
    Jebaraj S, Iniyan S. A review of energy models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2006, 10:281–311.
  • 3
    Greening LA, Bataille C. Bottom-up models of energy: across the spectrum. In: Evans J, Hunt LC, eds. International Handbook on the Economics of Energy (chapter11). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar; 2009.
  • 4
    Deane JP, Chiodi A, Gargiulo M, Ó Gallachóir B. Soft-linking of a power systems model to an energy systems model. Energy Policy 2012, 42:303–312.
  • 5
    Frei C, Haldi P, Sarlos G. Dynamic formulation of a top-down and bottom-up merging energy policy model. Energy Policy 2003, 31:1017–1031.
  • 6
    Horne M, Jaccard M, Tiedemann K. Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions. Energy Econ 2005, 27:59–77.
  • 7
    Bauer N, Edenhofer O, Kypreos S. Linking energy system and macroeconomic growth models. Comput Manag Sci 2008, 5:95–117.
  • 8
    Nakichenovich N. et al. Climate change 1995, Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific–Technical Analyses, Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change, WMO–UNEP. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1996, 75–78.
  • 9
    Weyant JP. Policy modeling: an overview. Energy 1990, 15:203–206.
  • 10
    Capros P, Karadeloglou P, Mentzas G, Samouilidis JE. Short and medium-term modelling and problems of models linkage. Energy 1990, 15:301–324.
  • 11
    Lehtila A, Pirila P. Reducing energy related emissions: using an energy systems optimization model to support policy planning in Finland. Energy Policy 1996, 24:805–819.
  • 12
    Messner S, Schrattenholzer L. MESSAGE-MACRO: linking an energy supply model with a macroeconomic module and solving it iteratively. Energy 2000, 25:267–282.
  • 13
    Yamamoto H, Yamaji K, Fujino J. Scenario analysis of bioenergy resources and CO2 emissions with a global land use and energy model. Appl Energy 2000, 66:325–337.
  • 14
    Argonne National Laboratory. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Analysis Using ENPEP: A Modeling Guide. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2001.
  • 15
    Babiker M, Reilly J, Mayer M, Eckaus R, Wing I, Hyman R. The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis Model: Revisions, Sensitivities, and Comparisons of Results. Cambridge, MA: MIT Joint. Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2001.
  • 16
    Barreto L, Kypreos S. Multi-regional technological learning in the energy-systems MARKAL model. Global Energy Issues 2002, 17:189–213.
  • 17
    Labriet M, Loulou R, Kanudia A. Global energy and CO2 emission scenarios—analysis with a 15 region world MARKAL model. In: Haurie A, Viguier L, eds. The Coupling of Climate and Economic Dynamics. Boston/Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Academic; 2004, 205–235.
  • 18
    Bataille C, Jaccard M, Nyboer J, Rivers N. Towards general equilibrium in a technology-rich model with empirically estimated behavioral parameters. Energy J. 2006, 27 (Special Issue on Hybrid Modeling of Energy–Environment Policies: Reconciling Bottom-up and Top-down):93–112.
  • 19
    Baumann M. EFDA-TIMES Model: management, co-ordination and documentation of the Model Master Version. Final Report. SubTask TW6-TREETM- MAN. SERF7. April, 2008.
  • 20
    Howells M, Rogner H, Strachan N, Heaps C, Huntington H, Kypreos S, Hughes A, Silveira S, DeCarolis J, Bazillian M, Roehrl A. OSeMOSYS: The Open Source Energy Modeling System. An introduction to its ethos, structure and development. Energy Policy 2011, 39:5850–5870.
  • 21
    Nilsson M, Heaps C, Persson Å, Carson M, Pachauri S, Kok M, Olsson M, Rehman I, Schaeffer R, Wood D, Van Vuuren D, Riahi K, Americano B, Mulugetta Y. Energy for a Shared Development Agenda: Global Scenarios and Governance Implications. SEI Report; 2012.
  • 22
    Uri ND. Forecasting peak system load using a combined time series and econometric model. Appl Energy 1978, 4:219–227.
  • 23
    Uri ND, Flanagan SP. Short-term forecasting of crude petroleum and natural gas production. Appl Energy 1979, 5:297–310.
  • 24
    Jeng-Wen L, Chia-Yon C. A cost minimization model for coal import strategy. Energy Policy 1996, 24:1111–1117.
  • 25
    Xie Z, Kuby M. Supply-side-demand side optimization and cost-environment trade-offs for China's coal and electricity system. Energy Policy 1997, 25:313–326.
  • 26
    Henning D. MODEST—an energy system optimization model applicable to local utilities and countries. Energy 1997, 22:1135–1150.
  • 27
    Steckley SG, Meade DS, Lenox CS, Hoffman KC, Reid DH, Schoener BCH. Energy demand analytics using coupled technological and economic models. Energy J 2011, 32 (Special Issue I, Strategies for mitigating climate change through energy efficiency: a multi-model perspective):173–192.
  • 28
    Energy Modeling Forum (EMF). EMF 25 Scenario Design. Stanford, CA: Stanford University; 2010. Available at: http://emf.stanford.edu/files/res/2372/25design2.pdf. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 29
    Energy Modeling Forum (EMF). Available at: http://emf.stanford.edu/docs/about_emf/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 30
    Clarke L, Edmonds J, Krey V, Richels R, Rose S, Tavoni M. International climate policy architectures: overview of the EMF 22 International Scenarios. Energy Econ 2009, 31:S64–S81.
  • 31
    IIASA-ECS models description. Available at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ECS/docs/models.html#MESSAGE. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 32
    Messner S, Strubegger M. User's Guide for MESSAGE III, WP-95–69. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis 1995, Laxenburg, Austria.
  • 33
    Riahi K, Roehrl RA. Energy technology strategies for carbon dioxide mitigation and sustainable development. Environ Econ Policy Stud 2000, 3:89–124.
  • 34
    Klaassen G, Riahi K. Internalizing externalities of electricity generation: an analysis with MESSAGE–MACRO. Energy Policy 2007, 35:815–827.
  • 35
    MESSAGE Regions Definition. Available at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ECS/docs/11worldregions.html. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 36
    Pan European TIMES Model. Available at: http://www.kanors.com/DCM/PET36/Docs/Index.aspx. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 37
    Loulou R, Remme U, Kanudia A, Lehtilä A, Goldstein G. Documentation for the TIMES Model. Energy Technology Systems Ananlysis Programme (ETSAP), April 2005.
  • 38
    IEA-ETSAP. Available at: http://www.iea-etsap.org/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 39
    New Energy Externalities Development for Sustainability—FP6 Project. Available at: http://www.needs-project.org/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 40
    Monitoring and Evaluation of the RES Directives Implementation in EU27 and Policy Recommendations for 2020–FP7 Project. Available at: http://www.cres.gr/res2020. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 41
    Risk of Energy Availability: Common Corridors for Europe Supply Security–FP7 Project. Available at: http://reaccess.epu.ntua.gr. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 42
    Research, methodologies and technologies for the effective development of Pan-European key grid infrastructures to support achievement of a reliable, competitive and sustainable electricity supply–FP7 project. Available at: http://realisegrid.rse-web.it/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 43
    Irish-TIMES Model at University College Cork. Available at: http://www.ucc.ie/en/serg/energypolicy/projects/irishtimes/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 44
    Capros P, Mantzos L, Papandreou V, Tasios N. European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030 (Update 2007). European Commission; 2008.
  • 45
    Capros P. The PRIMES Energy System Model: Summary Description. National Technical University of Athens–European Commission Joule-III Programme.
  • 46
    Capros P. The E3MLab Models. Presented at the PRIMES Model Seminar; Prague, Czech; January 17, 2011.
  • 47
    Tubbs WJ. A Simulation Model of Energy Supply and Demand for Climate Policy Analysis. Canada: Master of Resource Management Simon Fraser University Burnaby, BC; 2008.
  • 48
    Xianqiang M, Youkai X, Shengqiang L, Qin L. The application of CIMS model in China. Asia Energy Environment Modeling Forum (AEEMF); 2008. Available at: http://home.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/aeemf/4th_meeting/4th_materials/3rdday/S11_32_Liu.pdf. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 49
    Bosetti V, Massetti E, Tavoni M. The WITCH model: structure, baseline, solutions. FEEM Working paper N.10 2007.
  • 50
    Bosetti V, Carraro C, Galeotti M, Massetti E, Tavoni M. WITCH: a world induced technical change hybrid model. Energy J, Special Issue “Hybrid Modelling of Energy Environment Policies: Reconciling Bottom-up and Top-down”; 2006, 13–38.
  • 51
    Bosetti V, Carraro C, Tavoni M. Timing of mitigation and technology availability in achieving a low-carbon world. Environ Resour Econ 2012, 51:353–369.
  • 52
    Loulou R, Labriet M. ETSAP-TIAM: the TIMES integrated assessment model Part I: model structure. Computational management science, special issue. Manag Energy Environ 2008, 5:7–40.
  • 53
    Loulou R. ETSAP-TIAM: the TIMES integrated assessment model Part II: mathematical formulation. Computational management science, special issue. Manag Energy Environ 2008, 5:41–66.
  • 54
    Loulou R. Regional economic and energy implications of reaching global climate targets—A policy scenario analysis. Deliverable n.12 PLANTES project. 2009.
  • 55
    Babonneau F, Haurie A, Loulou R, Vielle M. Combining stochastic optimization and Monte Carlo simulation to deal with uncertainties in climate policy assessment. Environ Model Assess 2012, 17:51–76.
  • 56
    POLES model description—http://www.enerdata.net/enerdatauk/solutions/energy-models/poles-model.php.
  • 57
    World energy, technology and climate policy outlook 2030, WETO. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2003.
  • 58
    World energy technology outlook 2050, WETO-H2. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2006.
  • 59
    Deciding the future: energy policy scenarios to 2050. London, UK: World Energy Council; 2007.
  • 60
    GTAP Model Documentations. Available at: https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/models/current.asp. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 61
    Burniaux JM, Troung P. GTAP-E: an energy-environmental version of the GTAP model. GTAP Technical Paper n.16; 2002.
  • 62
    Bernard A, Drouet L, Vielle M. GEMINI-E3, A General Equilibrium Model of International-National Interactions between Economy, Energy and the Environment, V5.2. D3.3 TOCSIN Project no. 044287; 2008.
  • 63
    Bernard A, Vielle M. Assessment of European Union transition scenarios with a special focus on the issue of carbon leakage. Energy Econ 2009, 31:S274–S284.
  • 64
    Bernard A, Vielle M. Report to French Inter Ministerial Task Forces on Climate Change: Evaluations of the Kyoto Protocol with GEMINI-E3. Technical Report; 1999.
  • 65
    Capros P. et al. GEM-E3: Computable General Equilibrium Model for Studying Economy–Energy–Environmental Interactions. Brussels: European Commission Report EUR 16714 EN; 1995.
  • 66
    Capros P. et al. The GEM-E3 Model: Reference Manual. Athens: National Technical University of Athens Report; 1997.
  • 67
    Capros P, Georgakopoulos T, Van Regemorter D, Schmidt T, Conrad K. The GEM-E3 General Equilibrium Model for the European Union. International Symposium in Economic Modeling, Vienna, 1998. J Econ Finan Model 1998, 51–160.
  • 68
    Maisonnave H, Pycroft J, Saveyn B, Ciscar MJ. Does climate policy make the EU economy more resilient to oil price rises. A CGE analysis. Energy Policy 2012, 47:172–179.
  • 69
    Saveyn B, Paroussos L, Ciscar JC. Economic analysis of a low carbon path to 2050: A case for China, India and Japan. Energy Econ 2012, 34:S451–S458.
  • 70
    GEM-E3 Documentation. Available at: http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/activities/energy-and-transport/gem-e3. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 71
    GTEM Model Description. Available at: http://www.daff.gov.au/abares/models. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 72
    ABARE. The MEGABARE model: interim documentation. Canberra: ABARE; 1996.
  • 73
    Ahammad H, Matysek A, Fisher BS, Curtotti R, Gurney A, Jakeman G, Heyhoe E, Gunasekera D. Economic impact of climate change policy: the role of technology and economic instruments. ABARE Research Report 06.7. Canberra: ABARE; 2006.
  • 74
    Ahammad H, Mi R. Land Use Change Modeling in GTEM: Accounting for forest sinks. EMF22: Climate Change Control Scenarios, Tresider Memorial Union. California: Stanford University; 2005.
  • 75
    Global Change Assessment Model Description. Available at: http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/models/gcam/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 76
    Edmonds J, Wise M, Pitcher H, Richels R, Wigley T,MacCracken C. An Integrated Assessment of Climate Change and the Accelerated Introduction of Advanced Energy Technologies: An Application of MiniCAM 1.0. Mitigat Adapt Strat Global Change 1996, 1:311–339.
  • 77
    Edmonds J, Wise M, Sands R, Brown R, Kheshgi H. Agriculture, Land-Use, and Commercial Biomass Energy: A Preliminary Integrated Analysis of the Potential Role of Biomass Energy for Reducing Future Greenhouse Related Emissions. Washington, DC: PNNL-11155, Pacific Northwest National Laboratories; 1996.
  • 78
    Wigley TML, Raper SCB Future changes in global-mean temperatue and sea level. In: Climate and Sea Level Change: Observations, Projections and Implications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1993, 111–133.
  • 79
    Hulme M, Jiang T, Wigley T. SCENGEN: A Climate Change SCENario GENerator: Software User Manual, Version 1.0. Climate Change Research Unit, School of Environmental Sciences. Norwich, UK: University of East Anglia; 1995, 38.
  • 80
    Kim SH, Edmonds JA, Lurz J, Smith SJ, Wise M. The ObjECTS framework for integrated assessment: hybrid modeling of transportation. Energy J 2006, 27:63–91.
  • 81
    Kyle GP, Clarke LE, Rong F, Smith SJ. Climate policy and the long-term evolution of the U.S. buildings sector. Energy J 2010, 31:145–172.
  • 82
    FUND Model. Available at: http://www.fund-model.org/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 83
    Link PM, Tol RSJ. The economic impact of a shutdown of the thermohaline circulation: an application of FUND. Climatic Change 2011, 104:287–304.
  • 84
    Tol RSJ. On the optimal control of carbon dioxide emissions: an application of FUND. Environ Model Assess 1997, 2:151–163.
  • 85
    Anthoff D, Tol RSJ. The Uncertainty about the Social Cost of Carbon: A Decomposition Analysis Using FUND. ESRI Working Paper N.404; 2011.
  • 86
    Böhringer C, Rutherford TF, Tol RSJ. The EU 20/20/2020 targets: an overview of the EMF22 assessment. Energy Econ 2009, 31:S268–S273.
  • 87
    MERGE Model Description. Available at: http://www.stanford.edu/group/MERGE/. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 88
    Manne A, Mendelsohn R, Richels R. MERGE: a model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies. Energy Policy 1995, 23:17–34.
  • 89
    LEAP Documentation Page. Available at: http://www.energycommunity.org/default.asp?action=47. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 90
    LEAP Applications. Available at: http://www.energycommunity.org/default.asp?action=45. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 91
    Heaps C, Erickson P, Kartha S, Kemp-Benedict E. Europe's Share of the Climate Challenge Report published by SEI in partnership with Friends of the Earth Europe; 2009.
  • 92
    World Energy Projection System Plus Model Documentation 2010. World Industrial Model. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy-M079; 2010.
  • 93
    The World Energy Projection System Plus (WEPS+): An Overview 2011. Energy Information Administration. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy-M074; 2011.
  • 94
    Integrated Model to Assess the Global Environment Description. Available at: http://themasites.pbl.nl/en/themasites/image/index.html. (Accessed November 2012).
  • 95
    Tomassini L, Knutti R, Plattner G, Van Vuuren DP, Stocker TF, Howarth RB, Borsuk ME. Uncertainty and risk in climate projections for the 21st century. Climatic Change 2011, 103:399–422.
  • 96
    Pitcher HM, Sands RD, Fawcett AA. The Second generation model: future directions for model development. PNNL-15437. College Park, MD: Joint Global Research Institute.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (207K)