A technical appraisal of the IIASA energy scenarios
Tóm tắt
Several shortcomings in a major study of the world's energy system are described. The study, entitled Energy in a Finite World, resulted in widely publicized conclusions and urgent policy recommendations that were derived from detailed projections of the global energy future. A set of computer models was used to produce these projections, which are analyzed here in two ways. First, treating the models as a black box, it is shown that several principal results are effectively prescribed informally in input data that pass through the models unchanged. Second, despite claims of robustness, detailed sensitivity analysis shows that the energy supply projections are highly sensitive to perturbations in various input data. Early work that revealed this problem is not cited, and standard sensitivity tests are not provided in the study. Thus, despite the appearance of analytical rigor, the study's conclusions are evidently based on opinions rather than objective robust analysis.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Ausubel, J. and W. D. Nordhaus (1983). “A Review of estimates of future carbon dioxide emissions,” in Changing Climate, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Basile, P. (1981). Letter to The Energy Journal 2(4): 103–106.
DOGR - see ESP (1982).
EIA (1982). Projected Costs of Electricity from Nuclear and Coal-Fired Power Plants. Vol. 1. DOE/EIA-0356/1. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy Report, Energy Information Administration.
EIFW - see Häfele (1981a).
Energy Systems Program (ESP) (1982). The IIASA Set of Energy Models: Documentation of the Global Runs. Prepublication Issue (Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA). Abbreviated to DOGR in the text.
Foley, G. and Nassim, C. (1981). The Energy Question. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Freedman, D. (1980). “Are energy models credible?” in Validation and Assessment of Energy Models. National Bureau of Standards, Special Publication 616, Washington DC.
Grümm, H., Gupta, D., Häfele, W., Jansen, P., Becker, M., Schmidt, W. and Seetzen, J. (1966). Ergänzendes Material zum Bericht Kernbrennstoffbedarf und Kosten verschiedener Reaktortypen in Deutschland. KFK 366, KFK 466. Karlsruhe, FRG: Nuclear Research Center Karlsruhe.
Häfele, W. (1980a). “A global and long-range picture of energy developments,” Science 209: 174–182.
Häfele, W. (1980b). “IIASA's world regional energy modelling,” Futures February: 18–34.
Häfele, W. (1981a). Energy in a Finite World: A Global Systems Analysis, Vols. 1 and 2. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Volume 2 is abbreviated EIFW in the text.
Häfele, W. (1981b). “Energy in a finite world - expansio ad absurdum? A rebuttal,” The Energy Journal 2(4): 35–42.
Häfele, W. (1981c). “Putting the results of the IIASA energy systems program to work,” IIASA Reports 3(1): 49–68 (Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA).
Häfele, W. (1983a). “Energy strategies and nuclear power,” in G. S. Bauer and A. McDonald (eds.), Nuclear Technologies in a Sustainable Energy System: Selected Papers from an IIASA Workshop. Berlin: Springer, pp. 3–20; see also the Panel Discussion, pp. 319–28.
Häfele, W. (1983b). Lecture presented at IIASA Energy Workshop, Laxenburg, June 15, 1983.
Häfele, W. and Manne, A. S. (1974). Strategies for a Transition from Fossil to Nuclear Fuels. Research Report RR-74–7. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Häfele, W. and Sassin, W. (1978). “Energy options and strategies for Western Europe,” Science 200: 164–167.
IAEA (1982). Reviews of Nuclear Power Costs Around the World, by L. L. Bennett et al., IAEA Report IAEA-CN-42/76, September 1982.
Keck, O. (1981). Policymaking in a Nuclear Program: The Case of the West German Fast Breeder Reactor. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Keepin, B. (1982). Chaos in Nonlinear Dynamics and the Logistic Substitution Model. Working Paper WP-82–86. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Keepin, B. (1983). A Critical Appraisal of the IIASA Energy Scenarios. Working Paper WP-83–104. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Kok, M. Private communication, September, 1983.
Konno, H. and Srinivasan, T. N. (1974). The Häfele-Manne Model of Reactor Strategies: Some Sensitivity Analysis. Research Memorandum RM-74–19. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Kononov, Y. and Por, A. (1979). The Economic Impact Model. Research Report RR-79–8. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Landsberg, H. H. (1982). “Commentary,” in W. C. Clark (ed.), Carbon Dioxide Review. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 364.
Lovins, A. B. (1981). “Expansio ad absurdum,” The Energy Journal 2(4): 25–34.
McDonald, A. (1981). Energy in a Finite World - Executive Summary. Executive Report ER-81–4. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
McMurry, F. M. (1909) quoted in C. B. Cope et al. (eds.) (1979). The Scientific Management of Hazardous Wastes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marchetti, C. and Nakicenovic, N. (1979). The Dynamics of Energy Systems and the Logistic Substitution Model. Research Report RR-79–13. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Meadows, D. L. (1981). “A critique of the IIASA energy models,” The Energy Journal 2(3): 17–28.
Niehaus, F. and Williams, J. (1979). “Studies of different energy strategies in terms of their effects on atmosphoric CO2 concentration,” Journal of Geophysical Research 84: 3123–3129.
Nordhaus, W. D. and Yohe, G. (1983). “Future paths of energy and carbon dioxide emissions,” in Changing Climate. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
Pearson, C. E. (1974). Handbook of Applied Mathematics: Selected Results and Methods. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Perry, A. M. (1982). “Carbon dioxide production scenarios,” in W. C. Clark (ed.) Carbon Dioxide Review: 1982. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 337–363.
Peterka, V. (1977). Macrodynamics of Technological Change: Market Penetration by New Technologies, Research Report RR-77–22. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Rogner, H.-H. (1983). Colloquium on the IIASA energy scenarios held at IIASA, May 10,1983. The statement concerning sensitivity analysis was made in response to a challenge from the audience that careful sensitivity analysis had not been performed.
Rose, D. J., Miller, M. M. and Agnew, C. (1983). Global Energy Futures and CO 2 - Induced Climate Change, MITEL 83–015, MIT Energy Laboratory, Cambridge, MA.
Sassin, W. (1980). “Energy,” Scientific American 243(3): 107–117.
Sassin, W., Hölzl, A., Rogner, H.-H. and Schrattenholzer, L. (1983). Fueling Europe in the Future: The Long-Term Energy Problem in the EC Countries. Research Report RR-83–9. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Schrattenholzer, L. (1981). The Energy Supply Model MESSAGE. Research Report RR-81–31. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Schrattenholzer, L. (1982). Private communication.
Schumacher, E. F. (1964). “Review of EEC report on fuel and energy by the European Coal and Steel Community,” The Economic Journal March: 192.
Schwarz, B. and Hoag, J. (1982). “Interpreting model results - Examples from an energy model,” Policy Sciences 15: 167–181.
Suzuki, A. (1975). An Extension of the Häfele-Manne Model for Assessing Strategies for a Transition from Fossil Fuel to Nuclear and Solar Alternatives. Research Report RR-75–47. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Suzuki, A. and Schrattenholzer, L. (1974). Sensitivity Analysis on Hydrogen Utilization Factor of the Häfele-Manne Model. Research Memorandum RM-74–30. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Weingart, J. M. (1978). “The Helios strategy: An heretical view of the potential role of solar energy in the future of a small planet,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 12: 273–315.
Wynne, B. (1983). Models, Muddles, and Megapolicies: The IIASA Energy Study as an Example of Science for Public Policy. Working Paper WP-83–127. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA.
Wynne, B. (1984). “The institutional context of science, models, and policy: the IIASA energy study,” Policy Sciences, 17: 277–320.