Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In some countries, market intervention represents the Could policy misalignments be prevented by
status quo leading to consideration of policies engaging in better modeling and analysis to
focused on transition from a centrally planned understand how different policies might interact? In
economy to more competitive markets. But such the increasingly multidimensional policy
market deregulation may impact end consumers and environment, individual stakeholders that focus on
the social compact of a nation to the point of only one aspect of the problem may generate
misleading conclusions.
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 2
About KAPSARC
The King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center (KAPSARC) is an independent, non-profit
research institution dedicated to researching energy economics, policy, technology, and the environment across
all types of energy. KAPSARC’s mandate is to advance the understanding of energy challenges and
opportunities facing the world today and tomorrow, through unbiased, independent, and high-caliber research
for the benefit of society. KAPSARC is located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Legal notice
© Copyright 2014 King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center (KAPSARC). No portion of this
document may be reproduced or utilized without the proper attribution to KAPSARC.
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 3
Figure 1: Energy intensity reductions driven by government policies targeting industrially planning in China. Source: Blanford, G.,
S. Rose and M. Tavoni 2012 “Baseline projections of energy and emissions in Asia”, Energy Economics, 34-3-S284-S292
needed. The risk is that an iterative approach to is amended, the solution lies in either increasing
policy implementation disrupts the system and may market demand for gasoline or making changes to
frustrate consumers and investors, potentially existing technology (e.g., modifications to engines to
driving them out of the market. accept higher percentages of ethanol). This example
One example of unintended consequences is illustrates the danger of creating rigid policies with
provided by biofuel policies in the US. These do not targets that do not respond to changing market
appear to respond to market conditions. Among the conditions and ultimately create the need for
policies covering this market is a requirement that additional intervention.
the volume of biofuels to be blended with
conventional fuels is mandated at an absolute level, “In periods of drastic change, policy makers
rather than as a percentage. The policy assumed often dismiss model results that do not match
sufficiently high volumes of transportation fuel their world view based on their past experiences”
demand to blend any volume of biofuel. But there is
a technical limitation on how much biofuel can be
In the EU market, unintended consequences
blended into a fuel without the need to modify the
emerging from overlapping climate and energy
vehicles. In the case of gasoline, if demand
policies have reversed the decline in greenhouse gas
decreases, this limitation (known as the blend wall,
emissions. Policies included:
depicted in Figure 2) prevents excess ethanol
the European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS);
production from being consumed. Unless the policy
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 5
Figure 2: The blend wall impedes the production volume target set for the US biofuel market. (Courtesy Adam Christensen)
20/20/20 package targeting emissions, efficiency, not send a strong price signal to promote investment
and renewable power; and in low carbon technologies, since over-allocation of
permits by member states, emission reductions
the 2050 de-carbonization plan.
caused by other policies, and the global recession,
These were implemented during the restructuring of combined to drive down carbon prices.
gas and electricity through the Internal Energy
In the case of renewables policies, several EU
Market plan. One of the greatest challenges in
member countries pursued a subsidized “learn by
coordinating these objectives was the absence of a
building” approach to wind and solar that proved to
central government in the EU. Instead an approach
be more costly than anticipated. The policies
was adopted based on a political strategy where
distorted incentives to invest in integrated electricity
member states had the flexibility to select and design
markets and instead resulted in a hyper-competitive
the instruments used to achieve national targets.
internal electricity market that forced fuel-efficient
These policies were designed to foster competitive conventional plants into early retirement. Two
generation markets and reduce carbon emissions in different hidden subsidies exacerbated this: priority
the EU. However, the outcomes of these policies of dispatch, which favored intermittent, non-
have been large financial losses for utilities, very dispatchable generators while pushing out
high electricity prices, and an increase in carbon conventional plants; and an obligation to purchase.
emissions resulting from coal displacing natural gas. Feed-in tariffs incentivize intermittent producers to
Another unintended consequence is that the ETS did sell power even if the price drops below zero. These
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 6
producers are paid while other producers have to pay invests less on model documentation than the EIA,
to deliver electricity. As a consequence, creating a more opaque view of the assumptions
conventional plants pay the price for supporting behind its models. Extracting a clear message from
renewables and some now receive subsidies to the model output, for achieving better market
ensure they stay online to provide the needed system coordination, is correspondingly difficult.
reliability. Another undesired effect has been a move
to cheaper and more-carbon-emitting coal-fired “It is incumbent on modelers to achieve
generating plants. These unintended effects had been transparency, and it is naïve to assume a
identified by models, but had been dismissed by transparent model holds less power”
policy makers because such outcomes had never
happened before. The counterpoint is that the opaqueness around the
For the European Commission, planning in an Commission’s planning models allows transmission
uncoordinated way did not achieve the gains of various politically agreeable messages to the
expected from competition, while gains from direct various member states. Such an approach may
regulation were lost. EU policy design failures could obscure the consequences of a policy. Intentional
have been revealed through better integration of ambiguity within the political environment may
modeling tools that were already in existence within sometimes facilitate agreement by allowing all
the Commission. Models that take a systems view of parties to take something positive out of the
the economy arguably provide an important negotiation.
analytical tool for the difficult planning of cost From the perspective of the modeler, the political
effective subsidies. process may be to blame for poor policy design
Transparency and independence in rather than the model. The political environment can
modeling limit transparency, adding to the already difficult
task of communicating model results and offering
With the increasingly complex, interconnected policy insights.
policy environment, how an organization positions
itself with respect to transparency and independence “There is a thin line between being policy-neutral
plays an important role when building and executing and policy-relevant”
a policy model. The US Energy Information Agency
(EIA) positions itself as independent (by statute),
There is a tradeoff between policy staff and
focusing on policy neutral modeling for its annual
modelers enjoying a close relationship that enhances
report while having the capability to do detailed
effectiveness and the lack of transparency that may
policy modeling for the administration and
lead to informational imbalances among those
legislature. To protect its independence, the EIA
participating in the policy process. Experience shows
provides extensive documentation of its models and
that transparent models and clear documentation of
assumptions used in its reports in a transparent
assumptions create trust, communicate better
manner.
insights, and lead to more successful policies in
By contrast, there remains a lack of documentation terms of meeting expected outcomes. This
and information on the planning models used by the transparency leads to greater confidence among all
EU Energy Directorate. The European Commission parties involved in setting the policy agenda. It is
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 7
naïve to assume that withholding information provides insights into the initial steps for reducing
increases power for any individual constituency total energy costs in the Saudi economy, while still
beyond the very short term. satisfying current social goals.
Independence also takes time to establish. An Conclusion
organization can act independently and establish
protocols to ensure independence; however, a more Focusing on the subject of market regulation,
direct measure of independence comes from KAPSARC’s workshop on energy systems modeling
stakeholder feedback. Feedback from multiple highlighted the tradeoffs and issues spanning
constituents can act as a barometer of a model’s regulation of energy markets, implementing
independence. But an organization with too much sustainable technologies, and quantifying the impact
independence runs the risk of becoming irrelevant. of energy and climate policy implementation.
For organizations with a more transparent approach Governments often intervene to achieve social or
to modeling, a community of modelers can help political goals, mitigate the effects of externalities,
improve coordination of overlapping effort. For reduce the risk of market failure, or control the
example, Saudi Arabia’s Electricity and presence of market power. In some countries, market
Cogeneration Regulatory Authority (ECRA) created intervention represents the status quo and policies
a forum where knowledge is shared and may be focused on transition from a planned
disseminated on a formal basis – a multi-stakeholder economy to more competitive markets. But market
study on the Saudi energy economy. Within these deregulation may impact end consumers and the
forums, coordination between modelers, companies, social compact of a nation.
and regulators that influence the energy landscape Careful implementation of policy measures is
improved the local understanding of the energy advisable to maintain social welfare and prevent
sector. The KAPSARC Energy Model (KEM) is an unintended consequences, such as public unrest, if
example of a model designed to capture the physical intervention is to provide sustainable results. This
and market conditions specific to a country. The can be achieved by taking a broad view that
model was formulated as an MCP in order to incorporates majorly impacted sectors, improving
represent administered prices and fuel allocations coordination among government entities, and taking
within Saudi Arabia’s energy sectors. The results advantage of existing policy modeling tools to
from KEM clarify possible policy options that would identify what the effects will be ex-ante rather than
reduce growth of internal primary energy demand . It requiring repeated and contentious post mortems.
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 8
Ahmed Al-Osaimi – Director General Consulting Charles Meade – Visiting Investigator, Carnegie
Department, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Supreme Institution of Washington
Economic Council Fred Murphy – Senior Visiting Fellow, KAPSARC
Ayed Al-Qahtani – Senior Planning/ Analyst (and Prof. Emeritus, Temple University)
Consultant, Saudi Aramco Richard P. O'Neill – Chief Economic Advisor,
Nasser Al-Qahtani – Vice Governor, Electricity & Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
Co-generation Regulatory Authority (ECRA) Axel Pierru – Senior Research Fellow, KAPSARC
Ahmed Alzaid – Economic Specialist, Saudi Arabian Bertrand Rioux – Research Associate, KAPSARC
Monetary Agency (SAMA)
Muhammad Saggaf – President, KAPSARC
Atul Arya – Senior Vice President, IHS
Ahmed Salah – Deputy Minister for Economic
Robert Brooks – President, RBAC Inc. Affairs, Ministry of Economy and Planning
Adam Christensen – NSF SEES Fellow, Johns Christopher Segar – Regional Programme Manager,
Hopkins University International Energy Agency (IEA)
Carol Dahl – Professor, Colorado School of Mines Yves Smeers – Professor, Université Catholique de
David Daniels – Chief Energy Modeler, Energy Louvain (UCL)
Information Administration (EIA) Massimo Tavoni – Associate Professor, Fondazione
Brian Efird – Research Fellow, KAPSARC Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM)
Andreas Ehrenmann – Chief Analyst, GDF Suez, Michael Toman – Lead Economist on Climate
Center of Expertise in Economic Modeling and Change, World Bank
Studies (CEEMS) Sonia Yeh – Research Scientist, Institute of
Robert Flaechsig – Economic Advisor, Private Office Transportation Studies
of HRH Price Abdulilah Bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud
Energy Systems Modeling Workshop 9