Report by UK

First Order Draft, Metrics and Methodology: From Page 7 , Line 1 To Page 7 , Line 17
UK
While the FOD does state that "there seems to be a clear understanding that LCOE are not intended to be a defintive guide to actual electricity generation investment decisions", Branker et. al (2011) argue that the method "is deceptively straightforward and there is lack of clarity of reporting assumptions, justifications showing understanding of the assumptions and degree of completeness, which produces widely varying results". Branker et al. cite a wide range of LCOEs fo
View full comment by Michael O'Brien...

First Order Draft, Metrics and Methodology: From Page 7 , Line 1 To Page 7 , Line 17
UK
Darling et al. (2011) suggest that transparency could be improved calculating LCOE as a distribytion, constructed using input pararmeter distributions, rather than a single number. [Darling, S.B., You, F., Veselka, T., Velosa, A., 2011. Assumptions and the levelized cost of energy for photovoltaics. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 3133–3139.]
View full comment by Michael O'Brien...

First Order Draft, Metrics and Methodology: From Page 7 , Line 1 To Page 7 , Line 17
UK
While noting that system and installation costs vary widely, Branker et al (2011) document significant variations in the underlying assumptions that go into calculating LCOE for PV, with many analysts not taking into account recent cost reductions or the technological advancements that means modern panels have a much smaller drop in productivity (now 0.1 to 0.2% annually compared to the 1% used in many cost analyses). [K. Branker, M.J.M Pathak , J.M. Pearce, "A review of phot
View full comment by Michael O'Brien...

Breakdown for UK