[Annotated] A world turned upside down

Wind and solar energy are disrupting a century-old model of providing electricity. What will replace it?

From his office window, Philipp Schroder points out over the Bavarian countryside and issues a Bond villain's laugh: "In front of you, you can see the death of the conventional utility, all financed by Mr and Mrs Schmidt. It's a beautiful sight." The wind blowing across Wildpoldsried towards the Alps lazily^[각주:1] turns the turbines on the hills above. The south-facing roofs of the houses, barns^[각주:2] and cowsheds^[각주:3] are blanketed with^[각주:4] blue photovoltaic^[각주:5] (PV) solar panels. The cows on the green fields produce manure that generates biogas^[각주:6] which warms the Biergarten, the sports hall and many of the houses where the 2,600 villagers^[각주:7] live, as well as backing up^[각주:8] the wind and solar generators in winter. All told, the village produces five times more electricity than it needs, and the villagers are handsomely^[각주:9] rewarded for their greenness^[각주:10]; in 2016 they pocketed^[각주:11] about 6m euro($7m) from subsidies and selling their surplus^[각주:12] electricity.

It hardly looks like the end of the world; but Mr Schroder, who works at Sonnen, an energy-storage firm, has a point. Many environmentalists^[각주:13] want the world's energy system to look like Wildpoldsried's. And the things it is based on - subsidies for investment, very little spending on fuel, and moving electricity generation to the edge of, or off, the grid^[각주:14] - are anathema to^[각주:15] electricity markets and business models developed for the fossil-fuel age.

Few greens would mourn^[각주:16] them. But the fall in utility revenues^[각주:17] that comes with the spread of places like Wildpoldsried is not just bad news for fossil-fuel-era incumbents^[각주:18] in the generation and transmission businesses. It is also becoming a problem for the renewables themselves, and thus for the efforts to decarbonize^[각주:19] the electricity supply that justified their promotion in the first place. 

In 2014 the International Energy Agency (IEA), a semi-official forecaster^[각주:20], predicted that decarbonizing the global electricity grid^[각주:21] will require almost $20trn in investment in the 20 years to 2035, at which point the process will still be far from finished. But an electricity industry that does not produce reliable revenues is not one that people will invest in.

Less dear^[각주:22], still disruptive^[각주:23]

The fight against climate change has seen huge growth in^[각주:24] the "new" renewables, wind and solar power, over the past decade, both in developed countries and developing ones. in 2015 governments poured $150bn into supporting such investment, with America, China and Germany taking the lead. But Wildpoldsried is still very much the exception, not the rule. In 2015 such sources accounted for only 7% of electricity generated worldwide. over 80% of the world's energy still comes from fossil fuels. In terms of reducing climate risks there is a long way to go.

The good news is that a decade of subsidy-driven^[각주:25] growth has brought with it falling costs. Renewables are still on the pricey^[각주:26] side in many places, but they are getting less so; in some places wind, in particular, is reasonably competitive. This suggests that their growth might soon need a lot less subsidy than it has attracted to date^[각주:27]. Robust carbon prices would give renewables further advantages, but they have as yet proved hard to provide. The EU's emissions-trading scheme^[각주:28] is a perennial^[각주:29] disappointment: still, hope springs eternal, as witness a recent attempt to persuade the new American administration of the benefit of a revenue-neutral^[각주:30] economy-wide^[각주:31] carbon tax^[각주:32] devoted to^[각주:33] providing $2,000 to every family of four in rebates^[각주:34].

But pushing renewables into the electricity market has had effects on^[각주:35] more than their price; it has hit investment, too. In rich countries governments have imposed renewables on electricity systems that had no need for new capacity, because demand is in decline^[각주:36]. Investment in supply beyond what the market required has produced gluts^[각주:37] and pushed down prices^[각주:38]. In America this has been somewhat masked by^[각주:39] the shale-gas^[각주:40] revolution, which has caused a bigger shift in^[각주:41] the same direction. In Europe the glut of renewables is more starkly^[각주:42] seen for what it is. Wholesale^[각주:43] electricity prices have slumped^[각주:44] from around €80 megawatt-hour in 2008 to €30-50 nowadays.

The result has been havoc for^[각주:45] the old-style utilities. Germany's biggest electricity companies, E.ON and RWE, both split in two last year, separating their renewables and grid businesses from indebted^[각주:46] and loss-making^[각주:47] conventional generation. EY, a consultancy, calculates that utilities across Europe write off^[각주:48] €120bn of assets because of low power prices between 2010 and 2015. Investment in non-renewable is very low. "Never in recent history has the deployment of capital been more difficult than it is right now within the energy industry," says Matt Rennie, who analyses the global-utilities market at EY.

It is not just that efforts to shift to renewable power have added new sources of supply to an already well-served market. In an industry structured around marginal costs^[각주:49], renewables have a disruptive punch above their weight.

Electricity markets, especially those that were deregulated^[각주:50] in the late 20th century, typically work on^[각주:51] a "merit order": at any given time^[각주:52] they meet demand by taking electricity first from the cheapest supplier, then the next-cheapest, until they have all they need; the price paid to all concerned is set by the most expensive source in use^[각주:53] at the time. Because wind and solar do not need to buy any fuel, their marginal costs are low. They thus push more expensive producers off the grid, lowering wholesale prices.

If renewables worked constantly that would not, first blush, look like a problem for anyone except people generating expensive electricity. But renewables are intermittent, which means that in systems where the infrastructure was designed before intermittency became an issue - almost all of them, in practice - fossil-fuel, hydroelectric and nuclear plants are needed more or less as much as ever at times when the sun doesn't shine and the winds don't blow. And if such plants are shut out of the market by low-cost renewables, they will not be available when needed.

In the long run^[각주:54], and with massive further investments, electricity grids redesigned^[각주:55] for systems with a lot of renewable energy could go a long way to^[각주:56] solving this problem. Grids with lots of storage capacity built in; grids big enough to reach out to faraway renewables when the nearby ones are in the doldrums^[각주:57]; grids smart enough to help customers adapt demand^[각주:58] to supply: all have their champions and their role to play.

But long-run solutions^[각주:59] do not solve short-term constraints^[각주:60]. So for now countries with lots of renewables need to keep older fossil-fuel capacity available as a standby^[각주:61] and to cover peaks in demand^[각주:62]. This often means additional subsidies, known as capacity payments^[각주:63], for plants that would otherwise be uneconomic^[각주:64]. Such measures keep the lights on. But they also mean that fossil-fuel production capacity clings on^[각주:65] - often in particularly dirty forms, such as German power stations powered by brown coal^[각주:66], or backup diesel generators in Britain.

From dull^[각주:67] to death spiral^[각주:68] 

Properly structured capacity payments make it sensible^[각주:69] to invest in generators that can be switched on^[각주:70] when renewable energy is not available. But what will make it sensible to continue investing in renewables themselves?

When they are a small part of the system, renewables are insulated from^[각주:71] the effects that their low marginal costs have on prices, because as long as there are some plants burning fossil fuels the wholesale price of electricity will stay reasonably high. So utilities could buy electricity from renewable generators, often on fixed-price^[각주:72] contracts, without too much worry.

But the more renewable generators there are, the more they drag down^[각주:73] prices. At times when renewable can meet all the demand, making fossil-fuel prices irrelevant, wholesale electricity prices collapse - or sometimes turn negative, with generators paying the grid to take the stuff away (the power has to go somewhere). The more renewables there are in the system, the more often such collapses occur.

Rolando Fuentes of Kapsarc, an energy think-tank based in Saudi Arabia, claims the world is caught in a vicious circle^[각주:74]: subsidies foster^[각주:75] deployment of renewables; renewables depress power prices^[각주:76], increasing the need for financial support. Theoretically^[각주:77], if renewables were to make up 100% of^[각주:78] the market, the wholesale price of electricity would fall to zero, deterring^[각주:79] all new investment that was not completely subsidized^[각주:80]. He calls this vicious the clean-energy paradox: "The more successful you are in increasing renewables' penetration, the more expensive and less effective the policy becomes."

Francis O'Sullivan, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says the trend is already visible^[각주:81] in parts of America with abundant^[각주:82] solar energy. Utilities which are required to^[각주:83] have renewables in their portfolios^[각주:84], such as those in California, used to offer companies investing in that capacity generous long-term contracts. But research by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), a consultancy, shows that, as such utilities come closer to^[각주:85] meeting their mandates^[각주:86], solar-power developers are being offered shorter-term fixed prices with a higher subsequent^[각주:87] exposure to variable^[각주:88] wholesale prices. That reduces the incentive^[각주:89] to invest. Solar "cannibalizes^[각주:90] its own competitiveness away," Mr O'Sullivan says. "It eats its own tail^[각주:91]."

At the turn of the century^[각주:92], according to the IEA, one third of investment in electricity markets flowed into^[각주:93] "competitive" sectors that were exposed to wholesale prices; the rest went into^[각주:94] regulated utilities, transmission grids^[각주:95] and the sort of fixed-price contracts where the renewables got their start. By 2014 the share of investment in the competitive sectors was just 10% of the total^[각주:96]. It is a fair bet^[각주:97] that, the more renewables are exposed to competition by contracts pegged to^[각주:98] wholesale prices, the more people will shy away from^[각주:99] them as well.

Ever-lower capital costs, particularly in solar, could go some way to bucking this trend, making investments cheaper even as they become more risky. But if low-marginal-cost renewables continue to push prices down, there will come a time when^[각주:100] private investment will dry up^[각주:101]. As Malcom Keay of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies puts it, "The utility business model is broken, and markets are, too."

Renewables do not just lower prices; when used by customers, they also eat into demand^[각주:102]. Consider Australia. It has 1.5m households with solar cells on their roofs. There are a number of reasons for this. It is a sunny place; installing PVs was until recently generously subsidized; and electricity bills^[각주:103] are high. In part^[각주:104] that is to pay for some of the subsidies. In part it is because they pay for the grid, which has been becoming more expensive, not least because^[각주:105] it has had to deal with a lot more renewables. The IEA says that in parts of southern Australia, grid upgrades have doubled^[각주:106] network costs since 2008-09. Despite cuts to subsidies, Australian PV installations are expected to triple^[각주:107] over the next decade^[각주:108]. 

When fewer people rely on the grid, there are also fewer left to share the costs. Phil Blythe of GreenSync, a Melbourne-based company that works with utilities to moderate^[각주:109] the fluctuations of^[각주:110] renewable energy, warns that his country faces an incipient^[각주:111] "utility death spiral". The more customers generate their own electricity, the more utilities have to raise prices to the customers that remain, which makes them more likely to leave the grid in turn^[각주:112]. It won't happen overnight^[각주:113], he says: but it is "death by a thousand cuts".

From dromedary^[각주:114] to duck 

In California there is an icon for the effect that domestic renewables have on the demand for grid electricity, and thus on the revenues of utilities: it is called the duck. Every year more Californian consumers have solar cells. As a result, every year electricity demand during the day falls, and revenue falls accordingly^[각주:115]. Similar effects are seen in Germany, where there are now 1.4m PV users - mostly domestic. It is one of the reasons - subsidies are another - why domestic electricity prices have stayed high there while wholesale prices have fallen.

These home generators are not just reducing demand for grid electricity; often they are allowed to feed surplus power from their PVs into the grid, competing with other generators. In many American states utilities grumble about^[각주:116] the "net metering^[각주:117]" rate they are required to pay such people - especially in states like Nevada where they have been required to credit^[각주:118] the electricity fed in at the retail price^[각주:119], rather than the wholesale price^[각주:120]. And rooftop solar installations continue to grow, with 12 states more than doubling their deployment in 2016, according to BNEF. Businesses and industrial users are also becoming big consumers of renewable energy, which potentially reduces their dependence on the grid, and thus the amount they will pay for its services.

The response to these problems is not to abandon renewables. The subsidies have helped costs of wind and solar to fall precipitously^[각주:121] around the world. Competition is often fierce^[각주:122]. Recent auctions for offshore^[각주:123] wind farms in the North Sea and solar developments in Mexico and Abu Dhabi have shown developers slashing prices to win fixed contracts to supply clean electricity for decades to come. The "levelized^[각주:124] cost of electricity" for renewables - the all-in^[각주:125] cost of building and operating a plant over its lifetime - is increasingly competitive with fossil fuels in many places. Especially in sunny and windy developing countries with fast-growing demand, they offer a potentially lucrative^[각주:126], subsidy-free investment opportunity. 

But it does mean changing the way the world buys, sells, values and regulates electricity to take account of^[각주:127] the new means by which it generates it. "Thinking of wind and solar as a solution by themselves is not enough. You need flexibility^[각주:128] on the other side. It only makes sense if this is a package deal^[각주:129]," says Simon Muller of the IEA. Elements of that package are already appearing. Markets that sell commoditized^[각주:130] kilowatt-hours need to be transformed into markets where consumers pay for guaranteed services. A lot more storage will be needed, with products like those of Sonnen in Wildpoldsried and the Powerwalls made by Tesla fighting for space in people's homes. Smart grids bolstered by^[각주:131] big data will do more to keep demand in line with^[각주:132] supply.

In Wildpoldsried Mr Schroder dreams of electricity-users inviting friends round for a glass of wine to show off their new solar kits and batteries. "We'll soon be at a point where people say, 'You're so yesterday. You get your power from the grid.'" But peer pressure^[각주:133] is unlikely to be decisive^[각주:134]. Bruce Huber of Alexa Capital, which helps fund renewable-energy investments, says business consumers are probably going to be more influential in^[각주:135] driving the adoption of^[각주:136] these technologies than households, because they will more quickly see how they might cut their bills^[각주:137] by using demand-response^[각주:138] and storage. "For the last 100 years everyone has made money upstream^[각주:139]. Now the added value is coming downstream^[각주:140]," he says.

Waiting for enlightenment

Mr Huber likens^[각주:141] the upheaval^[각주:142] facing utilities to that seen in the telecoms industry a generation ago, when a business model based on charging per second for long-distance calls was replaced by one involving the sale of services such as always-on broadband. This is bad news for the vertically integrated giants that grew up in the age of centralized generating by the gigawatt. Jens Weinmann, of ESMT Berlin, a business school, names dozens of tech-like firms that are "nibbling" away at^[각주:143] bits of utilities' traditional business models through innovations in grid optimization and smart-home management systems. With a colleague, Christoph Burger, he has written of^[각주:144] the "big beyond" in which domestic energy autonomy^[각주:145], the use of the blockchain^[각주:146] in energy contracts, and crowdsourcing^[각주:147] of PV installations and other technological disruptions^[각주:148] doom^[각주:149] the traditional utility. Already, big Silicon Valley firms such as Google and Amazon are attempting to digitalize^[각주:150] domestic energy, too, with home-hubs and thermostats^[각주:151]. 

But how this nibbling leads to a system that all can rely on - and who pays for the parts of it that are public, rather than private, goods - remains obscure. The process will definitely be sensitive to politics, because, although voters give little thought to electricity markets when they are working, they can get angry when prices rise to cover new investment - and they scream blue murder^[각주:152] when the lights go out. That suggests progress may be slow and fitful^[각주:153]. And it is possible that it could stall^[각주:154], leaving climate risks largely unabated^[각주:155]. 

Getting renewables to today's relatively modest level of penetration was hard and very expensive work. To get to systems where renewables supply 80% or more of customers' electricity needs will bring challenges that may be far greater, even though renewables are becoming comparatively^[각주:156] cheap. It is quite possible that, as Mr Schroder predicts, Mr and Mrs Schmidt in Wildpoldsried will lay waste^[각주:157] the world's conventional electricity utilities while sharing Riesling and gossip with^[각주:158] the neighbors. But that does not mean that they will be able to provide a clean, green alternative for everyone. 

1. lazily ; [부사] 게으르게, 나태하게; 느릿느릿하게. [본문으로]
2. barn ; 1. 곳간, 헛간; 외양간 [본문으로]
3. cowshed ; [명사] 우사, 외양간 [본문으로]
4. blanket ; [타동사][VN] [흔히 수동태로] (격식) (완전히) 뒤덮다 [본문으로]
5. photovoltaic ; [형용사] (물리) 광전지의, 광발전의 ;; [fòutouvɑltéiik] [본문으로]
6. biogas ; [명사] 생물[바이오] 가스(특히 메탄가스) [본문으로]
7. villager ; (시골) 마을 사람 [본문으로]
8. back up ; ~을 뒷받침하다[도와주다] [본문으로]
9. handsomely ; [부사] 훌륭하게, 멋지게; 당당하게; 후하게, 관대하게 [본문으로]
10. greenness ; [U] 초록색; 신선함; 미숙, 풋내기임 [본문으로]
11. pocket ; 3. MONEY | (얼마의 돈을) 벌다 [본문으로]
12. surplus ; ~ (to sth) 과잉의, 잉여의 [본문으로]
13. environmentalist ; [명사] 환경 운동가 [본문으로]
14. off the grid ; [형용사] (신조어) 특정 사람, 가족, 거주지, 공동체에 전기, 상하수도 등 공공시설을 이용하지 않은 (off-the-grid, off grid, off-grid로도 표기함) [본문으로]
15. anathema ; [U , C] (주로 단수로 격식) 절대 반대(하는 것), 아주 싫은 것 ;; [ə|nӕθəmə] [본문으로]
16. mourn ; ~ (for sb/sth) (사람의 죽음을) 애도[슬퍼]하다; 애석해[애통해] 하다 [본문으로]
17. revenue ; [U] (rev・enues [pl.]) (정부・기관의) 수익[수입/세입] [본문으로]
18. incumbent ; (공적인 직위의) 재임자 [본문으로]
19. decarbonize ; [타동사] (엔진의 실린더 벽 등의) 탄소를 제거하다 [본문으로]
20. forecaster ; 예측하는 사람, (특히) 기상 요원[통보관] [본문으로]
21. electricity grid ; 전기 시설망 [본문으로]
22. dear ; [형용사] (古) 쓰라린, 냉엄한(hard, severe), 이만저만이 아닌 [본문으로]
23. disruptive ; [형용사] 지장을 주는 [본문으로]
24. see ; 15. EXPERIENCE | [타동사][VN] [진행형으로는 쓰이지 않음] 겪다, 보다 [본문으로]
25. subsidy ; [C , U] (pl. -ies) (국가・기관이 제공하는) 보조금[장려금] [본문으로]
26. pricey ; [형용사] prici・er , prici・est (비격식) 값비싼 [본문으로]
27. to date ; 지금까지 [본문으로]
28. emission trading scheme ; (행정) 가스 배출권거래제 [본문으로]
29. perennial ; 1. (아주 오랫동안) 지속되는, 영원한; 계속 반복되는 [본문으로]
30. revenue-neutral ; [명사] 세수가 늘어나지 않는(세제개정의 결과, 특정개인 또는 기업의 납세액이 변해서 늘어나는 일이 있어도, 정부 세입(revenue)의 총액은 변화하지않는(neutral) 것을 말함) [본문으로]
31. economy-wide ; 범경제 [본문으로]
32. carbon tax ; 탄소세(稅) ((온실 효과를 가져오는 이산화탄소 배출에 대한 세금)) [본문으로]
33. be devoted to ; ~에 전념하다 [본문으로]
34. rebate ; 1. (초과 지불한 금액의) 환불 [본문으로]
35. have effect on ; 효력이 있다 [본문으로]
36. in decline ; 하락[쇠퇴]하고 있는. [본문으로]
37. glut ; [주로 단수로] ~ (of sth) 과잉 [본문으로]
38. push down prices ; 가격을 낮추다, 내리다 [본문으로]
39. mask ; [타동사][VN] (감정・냄새・사실 등을) 가리다[감추다] [본문으로]
40. shale gas ; [명사] (지질학) 셰일 가스 [본문으로]
41. shift ; 1. CHANGE | [C] ~ (in sth) (위치・입장・방향의) 변화 [본문으로]
42. starkly ; [부사] 순전하게, 완전히. [본문으로]
43. wholesale ; 1. 도매의 [본문으로]
44. slump ; 1. ~ (by sth) | ~ (from sth) (to sth) (가치・수량・가격 등이) 급감[급락/폭락]하다 [본문으로]
45. havoc ; [U] 대파괴, 큰 혼란[피해] [본문으로]
46. indebted ; 2. (국가・정부 등이 다른 국가・단체 등에) 부채가 있는 [본문으로]
47. loss-making ; [형용사] 기업・사업체가 수익을 못 낳는, 손실을 보고 있는 [본문으로]
48. write off ; 1. (상업) (부채를) 탕감하다; ~을 실패한[무가치한] 것으로 보다[인식하다] [본문으로]
49. marginal cost ; (경제) 한계 비용[생산가] [본문으로]
50. deregulate ; [타동사][VN] [흔히 수동태로] (무역 등에 대한) 규제를 철폐하다 [본문으로]
51. work on ; ~에 노력을 들이다, 착수하다 [본문으로]
52. at any given time ; 어떤 시간에도 [본문으로]
53. in use ; 쓰이고 있는 [본문으로]
54. in the long run ; (앞으로 길게 보았을 때) 결국에는 [본문으로]
55. redesign ; [타동사][VN] 다시 디자인하다 [본문으로]
56. go a long way to (toward) ; …에 크게 도움되다 [본문으로]
57. in the doldrums ; 3. (일이) 정체 상태로 [본문으로]
58. adapt ; ~ (yourself) (to sth) (상황에) 적응하다 [본문으로]
59. long-run solution ; 장기적인 해결책 [본문으로]
60. constraint ; 1. [C] ~ (on sth) 제약(이 되는 것) [본문으로]
61. standby ; (pl. stand・bys) (필요하면 언제나 쓸 수 있는) 예비품[대기자/비상용품] [본문으로]
62. in demand ; 수요가 많은 [본문으로]
63. capacity payment ; (지식경제용어) 용량요금 [본문으로]
64. uneconomic ; [형용사] 사업・공장 등이 수익이 안 나는, 비경제적인 [본문으로]
65. cling on ; to hold something/somebody tightly; to not let go of something/somebody [본문으로]
66. brown coal ; 갈탄(褐炭)(lignite) [본문으로]
67. dull ; 7. TRADE | (특히 美) 침체된, 부진한 [본문으로]
68. death spiral ; 죽음의 소용돌이 [본문으로]
69. sensible ; 1. (사람이나 그의 행동이) 분별[양식] 있는, 합리적인 [본문으로]
70. be switched on ; 전원을 켜다 [본문으로]
71. insulate ; 2. ~ sb/sth from/against sth (불쾌한 경험・영향으로부터) ~을 보호[격리]하다 [본문으로]
72. fixed-price ; 고정[정찰] 가격, 정가; 공정[협정] 가격 [본문으로]
73. drag down ; ~을 (~로) 끌어내리다[몰락시키다] [본문으로]
74. vicious circle ; [명사] 악순환 [본문으로]
75. foster ; 1. [타동사][VN] 조성하다, 발전시키다 [본문으로]
76. depress ; 3. [타동사][VN] (물가・임금을) 떨어뜨리다[하락시키다] [본문으로]
77. theoretically ; 이론상 [본문으로]
78. make up 100% of ; ~의 100%를 차지한다 [본문으로]
79. deter ; (-rr-) ~ sb (from sth/from doing sth) 단념시키다, 그만두게 하다 [본문으로]
80. subsidize ; [타동사][VN] 보조금을 주다 [본문으로]
81. visible ; 2. 가시적인, 뚜렷한 [본문으로]
82. abundant ; (격식) 풍부한 [본문으로]
83. be required to ; ~하라는 요구를 받다 [본문으로]
84. portfolio ; 5. (특정 회사・기관의) 상품[서비스] 목록[범위] [본문으로]
85. come closer to ; 거의 ~하게 되다 [본문으로]
86. mandate ; 3. ~ (to do sth) (격식) (특정 과제의 수행) 지시[명령] [본문으로]
87. subsequent ; [형용사] (격식) 그[이] 다음의, 차후의 [본문으로]
88. variable ; 1. 변동이 심한; 가변적인 [본문으로]
89. incentive ; [C , U] ~ (for/to sb/sth) (to do sth) (어떤 행동을 장려하기 위한) 장려[우대]책 [본문으로]
90. cannibalize ; 2. (상업) (회사가) (비슷한 신상품 도입으로) 자사품의 매출 감소를 가져오다 [본문으로]
91. a snake eating its own tail ; 자신의 꼬리를 먹는 뱀 ;; 흐름상 "자충수" 나 "자신에게 손해를 끼치는 행위" 를 일컬음 [본문으로]
92. at the turn of the century ; 세기의 전환기에. [본문으로]
93. flow into ; …로 흘러들다. [본문으로]
94. go into ; …에 들어가다(=enter), 진출하다 [본문으로]
95. transmission grid ; 전송 관련 설비나 기관 [본문으로]
96. 10% of the total ; 전체의 10% [본문으로]
97. fair bet ; An assumption that is likely to be true. [본문으로]
98. peg ; 2. [타동사][VN] [주로 수동태로] ~ sth (at/to sth) (가격・임금 등의 수준을) 정하다[고정시키다] [본문으로]
99. shy away ; …을 피하다, 꺼리다 [본문으로]
100. there will come a time when ; ~할 시기가 올것이다 [본문으로]
101. dry up ; 2. (공급이) 줄어들다[고갈되다] [본문으로]
102. eat into ; (돈·시간을) 축내다, 부식하다, 침식하다, 파고들다 [본문으로]
103. electricity bill ; [명사] 전기요금 [본문으로]
104. in part ; 부분적으로는; 어느 정도는 [본문으로]
105. not least because ; 특히 ~이기 때문에 [본문으로]
106. double ; 1. BECOME TWICE AS MUCH/MANY | 두 배[갑절]로 되다[만들다] [본문으로]
107. triple ; 3배가 되다; 3배로 만들다 [본문으로]
108. over the next decade ; 차후 10년간 [본문으로]
109. moderate ; 1. 누그러지다, 완화되다; 누그러뜨리다, 완화하다 [본문으로]
110. fluctuation ; [명사] (방향·위치·상황의) 변동, 오르내림; 파동; (사람·마음의) 동요; [pl.] 성쇠, 흥망(ups and downs) [본문으로]
111. incipient ; [형용사] (주로 명사 앞에 씀) (격식) 막 시작된 [본문으로]
112. in turn ; 차례차례 [본문으로]
113. overnight ; 2. 하룻밤 사이에, 갑자기, 빨리 [본문으로]
114. dromedary ; [명사] pl. -ies 단봉(單峰) 낙타 ;; [|drɑ:məderi] [본문으로]
115. accordingly ; 1. (상황에) 부응해서, 그에 맞춰 [본문으로]
116. grumble about ; …에 대해 투덜대다. [본문으로]
117. net metering ; [명사] (태양열 등 대체 에너지 개발에 따른) 전력 요금인하 제도. [본문으로]
118. credit ; 1. PUT MONEY IN BANK | [타동사][VN] ~ A (with B) | ~ B (to A) (A에) (B를) 입금하다 [본문으로]
119. retail price ; [the ~] 소매 가격 [본문으로]
120. wholesale price ; 도매가격 [본문으로]
121. precipitously ; [부사] 험하게, 가파르게 ; 무분별하게 ; 급하게. [본문으로]
122. fierce ; 1. (특히 사람이나 동물이) 사나운, 험악한 [본문으로]
123. offshore ; 1. 앞바다의, 연안의 [본문으로]
124. levelize ; to even out, to equalize a source [본문으로]
125. all-in ; [형용사] (명사 앞에만 씀) 모든 비용을 포함한 [본문으로]
126. lucrative ; [형용사] 수익성이 좋은 [본문으로]
127. take account of ; ~을 고려하다[감안하다] ;; take sth into account [본문으로]
128. flexibility ; 3. 적응성, 융통성, 탄력성 [본문으로]
129. package deal ; (취사 선택을 허용치 않는) 일괄 거래[교섭]; 일괄 거래 상품[계약] [본문으로]
130. commoditize ; [VERB] another term for commodify ;; [타동사] <예술품 등을> 상품화하다, (상품으로서) 매매하다 [본문으로]
131. bolster ; [타동사][VN] ~ sth (up) 북돋우다, 강화[개선]하다 [본문으로]
132. in line with ; ...와 함께...에 따라. ;; ~와 비슷한; ~와 긴밀히 연결되도록 [본문으로]
133. peer pressure ; 동료 집단으로부터 받는 사회적 압력 [본문으로]
134. decisive ; 1. 결정적인 [본문으로]
135. influential in ; …에 영향력이 있는. [본문으로]
136. adoption ; 2. [U] (아이디어・계획 등의) 채택 [본문으로]
137. bill ; 1. FOR PAYMENT | 고지서, 청구서 [본문으로]
138. demand response ; 수요대응 [본문으로]
139. upstream ; (또한 드물게 up・river) ~ (of/from sth) 상류로 [본문으로]
140. downstream ; (또한 드물게 down・river) ~ (of/from sth) (강의) 하류로[에] [본문으로]
141. liken ; [타동사] (…에) 비유하다, 비기다 ((to)) [본문으로]
142. upheaval ; [C , U] 격변, 대변동 [본문으로]
143. nibble ; 1. ~ (at sth) (특히 음식을) 조금씩[야금야금] 먹다 [본문으로]
144. write of ; …에 대해 기술하다(=describe). [본문으로]
145. autonomy ; 2. 자주성, 자율성 [본문으로]
146. blockchain ; a distributed database that maintains a continuously growing list of ordered records called blocks. Each block contains a timestamp and a link to a previous block.[6] By design, blockchains are inherently resistant to modification of the data — once recorded, the data in a block cannot be altered retroactively. Blockchains are "an open, distributed ledger that can record transactions between two parties efficiently and in a verifiable and permanent way. The ledger itself can also be programmed to trigger transactions automatically." [본문으로]
147. crowdsource ; (신조어) 크라우드 소싱. 전문가나 아마추어 등 다양한 이들을 참여시킴으로써 그들이 지닌 기술이나 도구를 활용하여 특정 문제를 해결하는 것. [본문으로]
148. technological disruption ; 흐름상 "신기술의 도입과 그 영향" 정도의 의미 [본문으로]
149. doom ; [주로 수동태로] ~ sb/sth (to sth) 불행한 운명[결말]을 맞게 하다 [본문으로]
150. digitalize ; 디지털화 하다 [본문으로]
151. thermostat ; [명사] 온도 조절 장치 [본문으로]
152. scream blue murder ; (특히 항의를 하며) 죽어라고 악을 써 대다[절규하다] [본문으로]
153. fitful ; [형용사] 잠깐씩 하다가 마는 [본문으로]
154. stall ; 4. 교착 상태에 빠뜨리다, 지연시키다; 교착 상태에 빠지다, 지연되다 [본문으로]
155. unabated ; [형용사] (대개 명사 앞에는 안 씀) (격식) 조금도 수그러들지 않는 [본문으로]
156. comparatively ; [부사] 비교적 [본문으로]
157. lay waste ; …을 파괴하다[황폐케 하다](=destroy) [본문으로]
158. gossip with ; …와 잡담[한담]하다. [본문으로]