% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Behrens:1032430,
author = {Behrens, Johannes and Zeyen, Elisabeth and Hoffmann,
Maximilian and Stolten, Detlef and Weinand, Jann M.},
title = {{R}eviewing the complexity of endogenous technological
learning for energy system modeling},
journal = {Advances in applied energy},
volume = {16},
issn = {2666-7924},
address = {[Amsterdam]},
publisher = {Elsevier ScienceDirect},
reportid = {FZJ-2024-06237},
pages = {100192 -},
year = {2024},
abstract = {Energy system components like renewable energy technologies
or electrolyzers are subject to decreasing investment costs
driven by technological progress. Various methods have been
developed in the literature to capture model-endogenous
technological learning. This review demonstrates the
non-linear relationship between investment costs and
production volume, resulting in non-convex optimization
problems and discuss concepts to account for technological
progress. While iterative solution methods tend to find
future energy system designs that rely on suboptimal
technology mixes, exact solutions leading to global
optimality are computationally demanding. Most studies omit
important system aspects such as sector integration, or a
detailed spatial, temporal, and technological resolution to
maintain model solvability, which likewise distorts the
impact of technological learning. This can be improved by
the application of methods such as temporal or spatial
aggregation, decomposition methods, or the clustering of
technologies. This review reveals the potential of those
methods and points out important considerations for
integrating endogenous technological learning. We propose a
more integrated approach to handle computational complexity
when integrating technological learning, that aims to
preserve the model's feasibility. Furthermore, we identify
significant gaps in current modeling practices and suggest
future research directions to enhance the accuracy and
utility of energy system models.},
cin = {ICE-2},
ddc = {333.7},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)ICE-2-20101013},
pnm = {1111 - Effective System Transformation Pathways (POF4-111)
/ 1112 - Societally Feasible Transformation Pathways
(POF4-111) / 110 - Energiesystemdesign (ESD) (POF4-100)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1111 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1112 /
G:(DE-HGF)POF4-110},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:001352873600001},
doi = {10.1016/j.adapen.2024.100192},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032430},
}