Preparing New Energy Technologies for Market Adoption

Excited to share our new review article, which synthesizes evidence across disciplines to understand the #psychological and #contextual determinants of household clean #energy adoption. 🏠 Our review focuses on high-impact technologies with major climate change mitigation potential: • Electric vehicles • Residential solar PV systems • Heat pumps • Battery storage systems Despite technical progress and policy support, adoption rates remain lower than expected in most climate scenarios. Our review discusses why and what can be done to accelerate uptake. 🔎 Some takeaways from the review: 1️⃣ Psychological and contextual factors jointly shape adoption decisions. Decisions to adopt EVs, PV systems, heat pumps, and battery storage are influenced by cognitive biases (e.g., loss aversion, temporal discounting), motivational factors (e.g., values, worldviews, identity), and social influences (e.g., norms, peer behavior, symbolic meaning). These operate alongside and interact with structural conditions, such as income, infrastructure, and policy. 2️⃣ Consumer behavior deviates systematically from techno-economic assumptions. Standard energy models often assume rational utility maximization. However, real-world adoption is more complex and influenced by a wealth of factors, including bounded rationality, information misperceptions, and emotional responses—all of which can distort cost–benefit assessments and delay adoption, even when technologies are financially advantageous. 3️⃣ Contextual heterogeneity is critical but often under-addressed. Socio-demographic characteristics, geographic setting, institutional design, and cultural values significantly impact the likelihood of adoption and the effectiveness of interventions. Yet, much of the empirical evidence remains concentrated in high-income contexts. Broader cross-cultural and field-based studies are urgently needed. 4️⃣ Effective interventions must be both targeted and integrated. Standalone approaches—whether economic (e.g., subsidies) or behavioral (e.g., social norm messaging)—often fall short because they address only a subset of the barriers to adoption. We need intervention portfolios that are strategically matched to specific psychological and contextual determinants. Read-only (free) link: https://rdcu.be/epJUS Published version (paywalled): https://lnkd.in/dKSJZABs (I'm happy to share the published version - just message me.) Huge thanks to Anne Günther and Lukas Engel for leading this collaborative effort and to co-authors Matthew Hornsey, Joyashree Roy, Linda Steg, Kim-Pong Tam, Anne van Valkengoed, Kim Wolske, Gabrielle Wong-Parodi, and Ulf Hahnel! Copenhagen Business School University of Basel Environmental Psychology Groningen Centre for Sustainability International Energy Agency (IEA) #climatechange #behaviorchange

Technology readiness for renewable integration: is it about capability or is it about utilisation? Our analysis across 50 power systems reveals an important paradox: modern technologies can provide new grid services and evolve orders of magnitude faster than our regulatory frameworks can adapt to enable their participation: https://lnkd.in/dMK7H_Zk The most important technological solutions for stability and flexibility are already at high technology readiness levels, with some at demonstration level, and many others commercially mature and operating at scale. They can provide multiple grid services: - Batteries can provide voltage waveform stiffness, voltage control and inertia, as well as support energy shifting from sub-seconds to hours. - Smart charging and V2G can provide fast frequency response <2s while supporting daily energy management and peak shaving. - STATCOMs can provide voltage waveform stiffness, voltage control and damping of oscillations - Synchronous condensers are inherently grid forming and can provide fault current and inertia Unfortunately, we do not always take advantage of all these capabilities due to our slow-moving regulatory frameworks: - Grid codes often take years to update for new technology capabilities - Market participation rules structured around conventional generation - Procurement frameworks for system services slow to recognize new providers - Market design does not always align system needs with remuneration to participants - Verification and testing procedures are still often designed for traditional technologies - Complex stakeholder processes delay recognition of new technical solutions This isn't about downplaying the role of R&D - we absolutely need continued innovation. Instead, it is about highlighting an immediate opportunity: significant integration capacity exists in technologies that are already here, waiting to be unlocked through modernised frameworks. What regulatory reforms should be prioritised to better extract value from these technical capabilities? One approach gaining traction is the use of regulatory sandboxes to test new participation models, though broader reforms in how we develop and adapt regulations may be needed. And of course, power markets will need to continue evolving... Good work by Javier Jorquera Copier Rena Kuwahata Jacques Warichet and many other IEA colleagues!

Market development and marketing are not the same thing. I often get asked about what commercialization and go-to-market mean for climate tech. After going to Deploy 24 last week and hearing speculation about federal funding for climate technology moving forward, it strikes me as important to understand what market development and commercialization entails. It's not all about the 💰, but money doesn't hurt! At a high level, it's creating the market, i.e. developing the market, for a new technology. Many clean energy and climate technologies are not drop-in substitutes or readily plugged into existing infrastructure, for example: 1️⃣ EVs that could reduce fleet emissions overnight but must get into queue for service connection (often to the tune of several MWhs, which can take years!) 2️⃣ CO2 that needs to be compressed and transported for underground storage (perhaps BACK to the oil fields where oil is being transported FROM) 3️⃣ AI anything for distribution (low-voltage) grid infrastructure, for lack of data acquisition, storage, and compute infrastructure I could go on with more examples. I'm sure you can too. Developing the market is different from marketing. Whereas marketing is identifying product-market fit for an existing product or service and thereby developing communication channels to the customer, market development often includes a cross-cutting approach to eliminate the hurdles for infrastructure development and technology adoption: ⚖️ Cross-industry standard development and in some cases regulatory reform to establish safe operations 🪡 Defining new monetization pathways, which can include looking to other industries for revenue frameworks, working with public utility commissions on redefining electricity market tariffs, and taking an eye-drying deep look at tax code 🙋♀️ Finding the doers, the people who raise their hands to help figure out how to bring a new commercial model into the world with a first-of-a-kind test case of contract terms and technical operations

As we close 2024, I have been looking over the latest Technology Readiness Level assessment from IEA Hydrogen TCP , and what comes out looks quite compelling. Of course, production technologies such as electrolysis have reached an impressive maturity level (TRL 8-9), but the full value chain is more complex. The analysis done by the International Energy Agency (IEA) group shows: ✓ Alkaline and PEM electrolysis lead the market with a TRL of 9 ✓ Transporting compressed gaseous hydrogen is reliable with TRL of 10 ✓ Blue hydrogen using SMR + CCS and transporting liquid hydrogen remain immature with TRL ranging 3-5 What is really holding back on hydrogen developments? It is not the actual production, it is their integration at industrial scale. Sure, we can celebrate and be cheerful that 150 MW plants are operational for direct use, but that is besides the point. The final proof will be in scaling up the distribution networks and developing large-scale synthesis plants for low-carbon chemicals. The roadmap is therefore clear: proven and integrated technologies at industrial scale is what we need to bridge. Thus, there is a need for focusing on an additional wave of innovation and investments on R&D as we enter 2025 in order to reach our 2030-2050 goals. #RenewableEnergy #HydrogenEconomy #Sustainability #EnergyTransition #CleanEnergy #EnergyInfrastructure #CleanTech

Why do “proven” clean energy technologies still struggle to scale? This question keeps coming up across energy transition projects, especially those that look technically ready on paper. A core issue is that we often rely on Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) to judge readiness. But adoption is rarely constrained by technical maturity alone. I’m pleased to share a Nature Reviews Clean Technology Perspective I co-authored that addresses this gap by linking sociotechnical (ST) systems thinking with the Adoption Readiness Level (ARL) framework. ARL evaluates adoption risk across 17 dimensions organised into four core areas: • Value proposition • Market acceptance • Resource maturity • Licence to operate What this changes in practice: 1) Adoption readiness is context-dependent and non-monotonic. Technologies can move backwards when policy, market, or social conditions shift. 2)The constraints are often not technical. Institutions, permitting, supply chains, workforce availability, and community perception routinely dominate outcomes, yet they’re still under-analysed in many readiness discussions. ARL becomes genuinely useful when applied as a structured workflow: a) starting with a baseline assessment, b) identifying the dominant adoption bottlenecks, c) examining them through the appropriate STS lens, d) and then updating ARL scores alongside targeted actions. The practical takeaway is simple but important: 👉 “Can we build it?” and “Will it scale here, now?” are fundamentally different questions. I’m interested to hear from others working on deployment and system integration: Which non-technical barrier most often undermines otherwise strong clean-energy projects in your experience: permitting, finance, supply chains, skills, or social licence? Grateful to my co-authors Steve Griffiths, Joao M. Uratani, Aoife Foley, Vanessa Chan for a rigorous and rewarding collaboration. #CleanEnergy #EnergyTransition #TechnologyAdoption #EnergySystems #Policy #Innovation #SociotechnicalSystems #Sustainability https://lnkd.in/emj4SPn3

🏠⚡ Real-world smart meter data reveals how heat pumps, EVs, solar, and battery are reshaping electricity demand ⚡🏠 New analysis from Energy Systems Catapult's Living Lab shows how low-carbon technologies - solar, battery, EVs, and heat pumps - are fundamentally changing residential energy consumption patterns. Using smart meter data from hundreds of UK homes with different combinations of these technologies, my colleague Will Rowe uncovered the following patterns: 🚗 EVs: Demand shifting for time of use tariffs * Peak charging occurs between midnight-6am, showing consumers respond to time-of-use tariffs * Winter demand jumps 34% vs summer - critical for network planning during peak periods ♨️ Heat pumps: Flexible but weather-dependent * Two distinct daily peaks (3:30-6:30 and 12:30-15:30) indicate smart tariff optimisation * Summer consumption indicates ~75 litres hot water usage per household daily * Significant load-shifting capability suggests potential for demand response ☀️ Solar + batteries: Grid relief with seasonal patterns * Homes consistently show lower daily grid consumption across three seasons * Summer sees reduced overnight charging as solar-battery synergy maximises self-consumption * Clear evidence of energy arbitrage behaviour 🌆 The bigger picture:  Consumer behaviour demonstrates strong price responsiveness, but all technologies show pronounced seasonal variation. Winter represents the critical design case for network capacity planning. 🗞️ What this means:  As LCT adoption accelerates, understanding these real consumption patterns becomes essential for network reinforcement, generation planning, and designing future flexibility markets. Read the full analysis: https://lnkd.in/eDGhnjUm Want access to real-world energy data? The Living Lab's 5,000+ households are helping derisk clean energy innovation via sharing data and taking part in trials of new energy technologies. Contact our team via https://lnkd.in/ehQUnw2Y to discuss how we can help you. #EnergyTransition #HeatPumps #ElectricVehicles #SolarPower #NetZero #EnergyData #Decarbonisation

𝗡𝗲𝘁 𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸 by Government Office for Science   The Net Zero Technology Outlook is a futures exercise that sets out a ‘best estimate’ of the #technology mix needed in key emitting #sectors to reach #netzero by 2050, and identifies the #research, #development and #demonstration (RD&D) needed to get there. The #Outlook provides a #strategic #overview to help Orient #decisionmaking across #government and the #researchcommunity in support of the Clean Energy Superpower Mission. The Outlook does not reflect UK government policy or official positions. To inform our #analysis, we conducted over 20 #interviews and a peer #reviewexercise involving approximately 45 #experts from the research community, as well as #policy leads from relevant government #departments, during the second half of 2024. We also incorporated relevant material from established scenario #modelling, policy #documents, industry #reports and peer-reviewed #literature. This report covers five major emitting sectors, comprising a total of 18 sub-sectors: 🟥 #Industry: #steel, #cement, #chemicals, #glass and #ceramics, and #food and #drink 🟥 #Transport: surface transport, maritime and aviation 🟥 #Heat and #buildings: heating and cooling, energy efficiency and building design 🟥 #Agriculture, #landuse and #waste: agriculture, land use and nature-based solutions, and waste 🟥 #Power: variable renewables, clean firm power, clean dispatchable power, energy storage and system flexibility, and transmission and distribution For each sub-sector, we assessed the current technology and market readiness level (#TMRL) of #technologies that might be part of the mix in 2050. We also assessed the technology certainty level (#TCL), which reflects the current confidence that the technology #solutions will be part of the final mix. In some #subsectors, we included ‘wildcard’ technologies: novel and nascent technologies that are highly uncertain but potentially important. In some cases, the technology may be established in other countries’ #decarbonisation #pathways, but not the #UK’s. Technology certainty and readiness for each sector were evaluated using the framework in Table 1. The report also sets out RD&D #challenges for three crosscutting areas: greenhouse gas (#GHG) removals and Carbon Capture and Storage (#CCS), #hydrogen, and #biomass.