National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)NREL HomeInnovation for Our Energy Future
About NREL Science and Technology Technology Transfer Applying Technologies Learning About Renewables
Energy Analysis Energy Collaborative Analysis Initiative

More Search Options   
Site Map
Features
Energy Collaborative Analysis Initiative Newsletter
ECAI Home

Overview

Analysis Collaborative Topics
Collaboration Topic Matrix
Topic A.
Topic B.
Topic C.
Topic D.
Topic E.
Topic F.
Topic G.
Topic H.

Collaborators

Analysis Activities by Organization

Inaugural Workshop

Contact

Analysis Collaboration Topics

(H) Improve Behavioral Factors in Market/Choice Models and Tools

Topic collaborators are currently working on implementation plans, based on the workshop discussions — please watch these pages for updates. You can also find out more about the initiative participants on the collaborators page.

Activity No. 1 – Document Federal Government Behavioral Factor Data and Models

Activity Update (January 2007) -

Bill Valdez reported that there were ongoing discussions regarding the lack of data addressing technology adoption and behavioral factors. He's also cochairing an OSTP working group to examine how to improve portfolio analysis.

The Office of Science is considering behavioral science, and Valdez's office is developing a system dynamics model — called SE4 (economy, environment, energy and education) — with a component of behavioral science behind it. They'll be holding a workshop on this topic on Feb 8.

A recent report, "Examining Hydrogen Transitions," (PDF 707 KB) Download Adobe Reader by Steve Plotkin of Argonne National Laboratory, examines this analysis area. A crucial issue facing those trying to model a hydrogen transition is the difficulty of credibly modeling the behavior of the key actors who will drive a transition to hydrogen — consumers who may purchase hydrogen vehicles; vehicle manufacturers; fuel suppliers; and fuel distributors (and the investors needed to bankroll the latter three actors). Modeling consumer behavior is a difficult enterprise in the best of circumstances, but modeling potential buyers of hydrogen vehicles is further complicated by large uncertainties in how such vehicles will behave and how much they will cost, as well as by consumers' lack of experience with a hydrogen refueling system.

Activity Overview

  • Goals: Identify existing data and models on behavioral factors.
  • Current related activities:
    • Several models are used by DOE, EPA, DOT – FERAM model on vehicle choices and decisions
    • EIA actively monitors data availability and uses 3 classes of customers, based on previous equipment owned, but is cutting back on surveys (some entities will not sell data to EIA because they will lose customers; others allow data sharing – e.g. EIA piggybacks on ORNL vehicle data purchase from P.R. Polk (?))
    • DOE-EIA funded ANL survey look at CENSUS (clearance issues due to freight sector)
    • DOE-Science conducting an OSTP workshop on how to understand factors between science and technology; also looking at the value of knowledge
    • What activity is happening at the state level?
  • Next Steps:
    • Set up a meeting to discuss next steps
    • Through survey (or other means) collect information about existing data and models.
  • Lead: DOE-Science – Bill Valdez and DOE-EERE
  • Participants: EPA, DOT

Activity No. 2 – Identify and Communicate Best Practices

Activity Update (January 2007) -

Bill Valdez had conversations about this with PBA, NIH and Department of Agriculture. No progress beyond discussions.

Activity Overview

  • Goals: Compare data and model use and identify best practices.
  • Current related activities: see above
  • Next steps:
    • Compare how different agencies use the information and perform analysis (methodology)
    • Identify best practices to improve modeling of behavioral factors (including incorporation of data into models; consider cost/benefit and appropriateness)
    • Identify other options for getting data – including using universities for surveys, behavioral research or collaboration with private sector (associations, companies).
  • Lead: DOE-Science – Bill Valdez and DOE-EERE
  • Participants: EPA, DOT

Activity No. 3 – Convene a Behavioral Specialists Workshop

Activity Update (March 2007) -

Bill Valdez reported that there are funds available for behavioral science modeling and research and interested parties, including academicians and consultants, can contact him to discuss how to apply for funding.

The group is enthusiastic about holding a behavioral science workshop, but needs collaborator support.

Activity Overview

  • Goals: Bring together experts in the field to discuss data and tools and how to improve them.
  • Current related activities:
    • NSF asked for $7 million to do behavioral modeling (07 budget)
    • David Bornstadt doing some work for DOE-EERE-PAE
    • Defense labs are doing some agent-based work that might be helpful
    • Activity #1 – get picture of current data and models in order to know how to structure the workshop
  • Next Steps:
    • Work through OSTP process to help direct NSF's funding
    • Hold a meeting to begin planning the workshop, or perhaps a seminar series on consumer behavioral economics and behavioral factors
  • Lead: DOE-Science – Bill Valdez, OSTP, NREL
  • Participants: DOT, DOE-EIA, DOE-EERE, DOD, EPA, National labs

Common Themes

Despite the fact that the eight main energy analysis topics were discussed concurrently in two different sessions, there were several common, basic needs that emerged – needs that focus on some common information and analysis needs of analysts, the linkages between state and federal analysis, as well as the translation of results to decision makers, no matter what specific topic was discussed. The basic needs that emerged were:

  • We need a common language, and should agree upon definitions for the terms we use, so they are used consistently by all analysts,
  • States are not currently engaged as much as they should be in federal analysis and decision-making. We should create a stronger link between state and federal analysis,
  • There is a lot of data out there, but it is not centrally located. A central clearinghouse of current information, models and/or tools would be extremely helpful, especially to states who do not have resources to gather all of the information,
  • We should peer review and verify modeling methodologies,
  • Best practices should be identified, because it is not always easy for other analysts or especially decision-makers to understand how they should interpret and apply the results of energy analysis,
  • Analysis and results need to be accessible to decision-makers at high and low levels – we need to create tools that are transparent and easy to use and understand. Results always need to be clearly explained,
  • All impacts should be captured (not just cost), including economic development, env. impacts, security, health impacts, reliability improvements.

 

Printable Version

 
Skip footer to end of page.

Webmaster  |  Security & Privacy  |  Disclaimer  |  NREL Home