Simultaneous Supplies of Dirty Energy and Capacity Constrained Clean Energy: Is there a Green Paradox?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyze the effects of two popular second-best clean energy policies, using an extended resource extraction framework. This model features, first, heterogeneous energy sources and, second, a capacity-constrained backstop technology. This setup allows for capturing the following two empirical observations. First, different types of energy sources are used simultaneously despite different production costs. Second, experiences from various European countries show that a further expansion of the use of climate friendly technologies faces substantial technological as well as political constraints. We use this framework to analyze if under two policy scenarios a so-called “Green Paradox” occurs. A subsidy for the clean energy as well as an expansion of the capacity of the clean energy are considered. The analysis shows that while both policy measures lead to a weak Green Paradox, a strong Green Paradox is only found for the capacity expansion scenario. In addition, the subsidy is found to be welfare enhancing while the capacity increase is welfare enhancing only if the cost of adding the capacity is sufficiently small. Nous analysons les effets de deux politiques encourageant l’énergie verte, en utilisant un cadre élargi d’extraction des ressources. Ce modèle comporte, d’une part, des sources d’énergie hétérogènes et, d’autre part, une technologie verte dont l’exploitation est sous une contrainte de capacité. Cette configuration permet de capturer les deux observations empiriques suivantes. Tout d’abord, plusieurs sources d’énergie sont utilisées simultanément malgré l’écart de coûts de production. Deuxièmement, les expériences de divers pays européens montrent qu’une expansion accrue de l’utilisation de technologies respectueuses du climat fait face à des contraintes technologiques et politiques importantes. Nous utilisons ce cadre pour analyser si sous deux scénarios de politique un soi-disant « Paradoxe Vert » se produit. Une subvention sur le coût de l’énergie verte ainsi qu’une expansion de la capacité de l’énergie verte sont prises en considération. L’analyse montre que tandis que les deux mesures politiques conduisent à un Paradoxe Vert faible, un Paradoxe Vert fort est seulement trouvé pour le scénario d’expansion de la capacité. En outre, la subvention améliore le bien-être, alors que l’accroissement de la capacité ne favorise le bien-être que si le coût d’ajout de la capacité est suffisamment faible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".