Publications
92 results found
Gross R, Candelise C, 2011, ICEPT Response to Joint Environmental Audit Committee and Energy and Climate Change Committee call for Evidence on PV Feed in Tariffs
Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2011, Liberalised Energy Markets: An obstacle to renewables?, Uk Energy Policy and the End of Market Fundamentalism Critical Analysis, Editors: Rutledge, Wright, Oxford, Publisher: Oxford University Press, ISBN: 9780199593002
Drawing a parallel between the effect of liberalisation on energy markets with theeffect of liberalisation on financial markets, this book provides timely ...
Slade R, Bauen A, Gross R, 2011, Estimating bio-energy resource potentials to 2050: Lessons from the UK experience, Energy & Environmental Science, Pages: 2645-2657
Candelise C, Speirs J, Gross R, 2011, Materials availability for thin film (TF) PV technologies development: a real concern?, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol: 15, Pages: 4972-4981, ISSN: 1364-0321
Decarbonisation goals have triggered photovoltaic (PV) sector expansion and cost reductions in PV technologies. Thin film (TF) PV technologies are currently the cheapest to manufacture and offer the possibility of attaining lower costs. However, scarcity of key component materials has been highlighted as a potential barrier to both large scale deployment and reductions in technology cost. This paper explores this claim for cadmium telluride (CdTe) and copper indium gallium (di)selenide (CIGS) TF technologies and their potentially constraining materials, tellurium and indium. It reviews key literature, highlighting the high uncertainty in the estimates of the resource constrained TF PV potential as well as in data and methodologies used to assess future availability of the targeted materials. The reviewed evidence does not support the contention that the availability of tellurium and indium will necessarily constrain CdTe and CIGS technologies respectively in their ability to supply expected future PV market growth. However, future escalation in indium and tellurium price resulting from demand–supply imbalances could have a negative impact on CdTe and CIGS cost reduction ambitions. Factors influencing indium and tellurium price and their relative contribution to TF PV module production cost need further investigation.
Gross R, Blyth W, Heptonstall P, 2010, Risks, revenues and investment in electricity generation: Why policy needs to look beyond costs, Energy Economics, Vol: 32, Pages: 796-804
Candelise C, Gross RJ, Leach M, 2010, Conditions for photovoltaics deployment in the UK: the role of policy and technical developments, Journal of Power and Energy, Vol: 224, Pages: 153-166
Steggals W, Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2010, Winds of change: How high wind penetrations will affect investment incentives in the GB electricity sector, Energy Policy, Vol: 39, Pages: 1389-1396
Gross R, Anable J, Heptonstall P, et al., 2009, What policies are effective at reducing carbon emissions from surface passenger transport? A review of interventions to encourage behaviour and technical change, London, Publisher: Imperial College, ISBN: 1 903144078
Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2008, Renewables and the grid: understanding intermittency, Energy Vol., no. 1, pp.–, Vol: 160, Pages: 31-41
Collins C, Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2008, Is there an 'Energy Gap', Proceedings of ICE, Energy, Vol: 161, Pages: 145-157, ISSN: 1751-4231
A number of authors have suggested that the UK faces a ‘looming energy gap’ in the coming decade because of an increasing dependence on imported fuels, the closure of a number of electricity generators and a perceived lack of investment in new generating capacity. Focusing on electricity generation, this paper seeks to clearly define what an energy gap is, explain why there may be concerns over such a gap and identify the reasons why a gap may or may not materialise. A central contention of this paper is that there is confusion over the two forms of energy gap,namely a ‘fuel gap’ that would occur if insufficient fuel were available to generators to produce electricity and a ‘capacity gap’ that would occur with insufficient generation capacity to convert available fuel into electricity. This conflation is unhelpful because the reasons for, and policy responses to, these two forms of gap may be quite distinct. The paper goes on to explore the issues surrounding these two manifestations of an energy gap and how they relate to policy.
Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2008, The costs and impacts of intermittency: An ongoing debate, Energy Policy, Vol: 36, Pages: 4005-4007
A recent issue of Energy Policy carried a new contribution to the ongoing debate over the implications of a high penetration of wind power for the UK electricity system [Oswald, J., Raine, M., Ashraf-Ball, H., 2008. Will British weather provide reliable electricity? Energy Policy 36 (8), 3202–3215]. That paper made a number of points that require comment or qualification, in relation to both system-wide impacts and the impact on conventional thermal generation. The purpose of this forum piece is to respond to these points, and to explain where we believe the Oswald paper risks repeating the mistakes of the past by interpreting data in a selective manner, or by erroneously singling out alarming sounding findings which do not reflect how electricity systems and markets operate. The latest EU renewable energy targets do imply a wind penetration level which is considerably higher than that which has hitherto been envisaged, and new research is require to understand the potential impacts. However, such research must be based on statistical or time series simulation modelling.
Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2008, The costs and impacts of intermittency: An ongoing debate, Energy Policy, Vol: 36, Pages: 4005-4007
Skea J, Anderson D, Green T, et al., 2008, Intermittent renewable generation and maintaining power system reliability, Generation, Transmission & Distribution, Vol: 2, Pages: 82-89, ISSN: 1751-8687
There have been attempts, using various approaches, to assess the additional cost of running an electricity system when intermittent renewable generation is used to provide a significant proportion of the energy. The key issues are the difference, in statistical terms, between the resource availability of the intermittent source and conventional generation and the contribution the intermittent source can make to meet the system peak demand while maintaining system reliability. There is considerable agreement over the capacity credits that can be attributed to renewable energy sources, that is the amount of conventional capacity that renewables can reliablydisplace, yet the implications for costs have proved more controversial. Approaches to calculate changes in overall system cost are examined and an expression for the additional cost that intermittent generation imposes on a system that is attributable to its intermittent nature is identified. Further, it is shown that this expression can be reconciled with approaches that look at intermittent renewables on a stand-alone basis and factor in the additional costs of ‘standby’ capacity. It is shown that the main source of divergence between estimates of the cost of intermittency is the load factor implicitly assumed for the conventional plant used as a reference. There is only one consistent way to impute the costs of intermittency when the unit cost of intermittent plant is being compared with that of baseload generation plant.
Gross R, Heptonstall P, Collins C, 2008, Is there an 'Energy Gap?', Proceedings of ICE, Energy, Vol: 161, Pages: 145-157, ISSN: 1751-4231
Gross R, Blyth W, Heptonstall P, 2007, Investment in electricity generation: the role of costs, incentives and risks, London, Publisher: Imperial College, ISBN: 1 903144051
Gross R, Heptonstall P, 2006, The problem of intermittency: overrated or understated?, Modern Power Systems, Vol: 26, Pages: 30-31, ISSN: 0260-7840
Gross R, Heptonstall P, Anderson D, et al., 2006, The costs and impacts of intermittency, A report of the technology and policy assessment function of the UKERC, London, Publisher: Imperial College, ICEPT/UKERC
Foxon TJ, Gross R, Chase A, et al., 2005, UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures, ENERGY POLICY, Vol: 33, Pages: 2123-2137, ISSN: 0301-4215
- Author Web Link
- Cite
- Citations: 324
Gross R, 2004, Technologies and innovation for system change in the UK: status, prospects and system requirements of some leading renewable energy options, ENERGY POLICY, Vol: 32, Pages: 1905-1919, ISSN: 0301-4215
- Author Web Link
- Cite
- Citations: 36
Gross R, 2004, Renewable energy in the UK: an Issue of scale, Micro Energy Systems, Editors: Knowles M, Burdon I, Beith R, Bury St Edmonds, Publisher: Professional Engineering Publishing, Pages: 9-29, ISBN: 9781860584268
Marsh G, Taylor P, Anderson D, et al., 2003, Options for a low carbon future Phase II, a report for the DTI, DTI Economics Paper No. 4., London, Publisher: The Stationary Office, 4
Gross R, Leach M, Bauen A, 2003, Progress in renewable energy., Environ Int, Vol: 29, Pages: 105-122, ISSN: 0160-4120
This paper provides an overview of some of the key technological and market developments for leading renewable energy technologies--wind, wave and tidal, photovoltaics (PV) and biomass energy. Market growth, innovation and policy are closely interrelated in the development of renewables and the key issues in each area are explored for each of the main types of renewable energy technology. This enables the prospects for future development and cost reduction to be considered in detail. Key issues for policy are outlined.
Robert Gross, Timothy J Foxon, 2003, Policy support for innovation to secure improvements in resource productivity, International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Vol: 3, Pages: 118-130
Gross R, Foxon TJ, 2003, Policy support for innovation to secure improvements in resource efficiency, International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Vol: 3, Pages: 118-130
Gross R, Foxon T, Anderson D, 2003, Innovation in long term renewables options in the UK – overcoming barriers and ‘systems failures’ a report for the DTI., Innovation in long term renewables options in the UK – overcoming barriers and ‘systems failures’ a report for the DTI., London, Publisher: Published by the DTI at http://www.ecdti.co.uk/cgibin/perlcon.pl
Hartley N, MacKerron G, Mitchell C, et al., 2002, The Energy Review, a report to Government by the Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU), London, Publisher: The Stationary Office
Anderson D, Gross R, 2002, Assessment of Technical options to address climate change, a report to the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, London, Publisher: The strategy Unit, Cabinet Office
Gross R, Chapman J, 2001, Technical and economic potential of renewable energy generating technologies: Potentials and costs reductions to 2020. PIU Working Paper for the Energy Review, London, Publisher: The Cabinet Office
Gross R, Coates, Ian, 2001, Resource Productivity: Making more with less, a PIU report to government, London, Publisher: the Stationary Office
Anderson D, Gross R, 2000, Responding to climate change: will the required energy technologies become available? Some questions for UK policies, Meeting of the British-Association, Publisher: ELSEVIER SCI LTD, Pages: 217-222, ISSN: 0301-4215
- Author Web Link
- Cite
- Citations: 1
This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.