This CAREER project addresses issues related to decision making under uncertainty for climate change. Specifically, the overall objective is to apply science to science policy, to improve the analysis and evaluation of alternate portfolios of technology R&D programs in response to climate change. The specific research objectives are: (1) Investigate the optimal technology R&D portfolio in the face of uncertain climate change, using data derived from prior expert elicitations, and using a multiple model approach; and (2) Provide a vehicle for communication to policy makers and the public, through the design and testing of a decision support system (DSS) aimed at the evaluation of technology R&D portfolios in response to climate change. The specific teaching objectives are: (1) Provide a forum for informal education, putting the DSS on the web next to a carbon footprint calculator, introducing the public to key concepts in climate change, energy technologies, and uncertainty; (2) Prepare case studies appropriate for operations research students at both the graduate and undergraduate level; (3) Provide decision support, including training and information on decision making under uncertainty, to policy makers and stakeholders through the decision tool.
One tool in the national arsenal for combatting climate change is investment in cutting-edge low-carbon energy technologies. If we can develop cleaner, less expensive ways of generating electricity or powering vehicles, we will be one step closer to solving climate change. The government is a key player in supporting Research and Development (R&D) into new energy technologies. But, deciding how to allocate a limited budget across a number of different technologies is a daunting task. It is made even more difficult when you factor in the uncertainty about how any particular technology program will turn out as well as uncertainty about the eventual damages from climate change. The government can invest in a portfolio of energy technology projects, much like an individual can invest in a portfolio of stocks and bonds. In this project, Erin Baker and her collaborators are applying knowledge from a number of fields, including Decision Analysis, Economics, and Operations Research, in order to provide insights into the best mix of R&D programs. Baker’s research employs interviews with experts combined with sophisticated mathematical modeling techniques to inform government policy makers about what makes a good energy technology R&D portfolio for cutting greenhouse emissions cost-effectively in the future. Baker’s work has focused on a set of five key low-carbon electricity technologies – solar photovoltaics, nuclear power, carbon capture and storage (a technology that can capture the carbon dioxide emitted by coal- or gas-fired plants before it is released into the atmosphere, and store it in underground aquifers), liquid biofuels, and biomass for electricity. In collaboration with a large group of researchers under the banner of The Elicitation and Modeling Project, or TEaM, Baker brought together three major efforts based on expert judgments. This project consolidated what the scientific community across both sides of the Atlantic believe will be the impact of public R&D investments on the 2030 costs of these five key energy technologies. They find that scientific knowledge on the impact of R&D investments on the future of energy technologies does not justify a strategy of focusing on one or two technologies: no single technology stands out across the studies as having consistently higher returns or being less risky. The wide range of uncertainty and disagreement regarding the impact of R&D suggests that it is too early to pick winners; it is best to focus on spreading bets across a wide range of near-term investments, into both R&D and into the methods that we used to understand the future prospects for technologies. On the other hand, Baker’s work has shown that some portfolios are robust to a wide range of assumptions. In a paper co-authored by Senay Solak, they found that the same set of technologies is at the top of the list for investment whether the climate emissions policy is aggressive or go-slow. The reason for this is that technological change in energy technologies plays a different, but important role in both policy environments. In a policy where emissions reductions are low in the absence of technological change, then a breakthrough in energy technology tends to significantly increase the amount of emissions that are reduced, thus improving the environmental outcomes, such as reducing temperature rise. On the other hand, in a policy where emission reductions are high, a breakthrough in technology tends to significantly reduce the cost of emissions reductions. This is good news because it means that governments can move forward with investments into research in breakthrough energy technologies, such as solar, nuclear, and carbon capture, without knowing exactly where politics and science will lead to in climate policy. This finding was confirmed in another paper, co-authored by Olaitan Olaleye and Lara Aleluia Reis. In this paper they find that if damages from climate change are high, then the world should invest in more R&D when there is no emissions policy than when there is a clear emissions policy. This is because improvements in technologies such as nuclear power, solar, and biofuels will lead to a reduction in emissions even if there is no policy in place. An important aspect of making technological changes a reality is educating the engineers who will design, build, and implement these technologies in the economy. Baker’s class on Engineering Sustainability: Energy and the Environment is a step in this direction. This introduction-to-engineering course is intended to not only help students gain the skills they need to succeed as engineering students and professionals; but will also help them make sustainability a core part of their approach to solving problems and creating opportunities. In this course, students work in teams to design and evaluate projects under the auspices of the UMass Climate Action Plan. Projects considered included a solar canopy for a parking lot, double-paned windows in the dorms, and occupancy sensors for controlling the lights in the library.
