Future Grid: The Environment · Life Cycle Analysis Cohen Hubal, E. and M. Overcash. Net waste...

Future Grid: The Environment

Ward Jewell, Wichita State University

Judith Cardell, Smith College

Lindsay Anderson, Cornell University

Janet Twomey, Wichita State University

Michael Overcash, Wichita State University

PSERC Future Grid Initiative Webinar Series February 21, 2012

History – Air Pollution Events North America and Western Europe

(not electric energy related)

Donora, Pennsylvania, October 1948 London, December 1952

2

History – Environmental Standards for the US electric energy industry

• Air Pollution Control Act of 1955

• Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) 1949/72

• Clean Air Act: 1963/67/70/90

3

Existing Environmental Regulations for the US electric energy industry

• Nitrous Oxides (Nox)

• Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

• Particulate Matter (including flyash)

• Discharge of waste into water

4

• Cross -State Air Pollution Rule, July 2011 – Stayed December 30 by US Court of Appeals,

transitioning back to Clean Air Interstate Rule

• Mercury and Air Toxics Rule, December 2011

New Environmental Regulations for the US electric energy industry

5

• Solid Waste Rule, 2011

• Clean Water Act § 316(b), April 20, 2011

– Once through cooling

New Environmental Regulations for the US electric energy industry

6

Future Environmental Challenges for the Electric Energy Industry

1. Mitigation of greenhouse gases

2. Adapting to changing climate

3. Availability of water

7

Mitigation of greenhouse gases Atmospheric CO2

8

Shares of Greenhouse Gases

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency , December 20, 2011, www.pbl.nl/en/dossiers/Climatechange/FAQs/?vraag=10&title=Which%2520are%2520the%2520top-20%2520CO2%2520or%2520GHG%2520emitting%2520countries%253F#vraag9

9

US CO2 emissions

Energy Information Administration, US Department of Energy,

www.eia.doe.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/ghg_overview.cfm

Coal: 205-225 lb CO2/MBtu Oil: 156-174 lb CO2/MBtu Gas : 117-139 lb CO2/MBtu

10

CO2 limits

Kyoto: 5% below 1990 by 2012 EU: 20% below 1990 by 2020 Canada: 20% below 2006 by 2020 RGGI: 10% below 2009 by 2018 California: 15% below 2005 by 2020 Florida: 2000 levels by 2017

1990 levels by 2025 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050

Illinois: new coal plants must capture carbon 2009-2015: 50%, 2016-2017: 70 %, 2017+: 90 %

IPCC: 50-85% below 2000 by 2050 Obama: 80% below 2000 by 2050 Durban, 2011: no international agreement

11

RGGI Auction: March 2011 $1.89/ ton CO2

Proceeds are invested in “programs that benefit consumers and build a clean energy economy.”

52% improve energy efficiency 11% accelerate the deployment of renewable energy

14% provide energy bill payment assistance 1% other greenhouse gas reduction programs

12

EU Emission Trading Scheme

• Market opened in 2005

• Futures: 16-20 € /metric ton (1000 kg) CO2

= 20-26 $/ton

• Spot market suspended January 2011 after cybertheft of > €30M CO2 allowances

Trading has resumed in most markets

• “at least half the revenue … should be used to fight and adapt to climate change”

• http://ec.europa.eu/clima/faq/ets/auctioning_en.htm

13

Technologies to limit greenhouse gas emissions fuel switching: coal to natural gas

Miaolei Shao, The Effects of Greenhouse Gas Limits on Electric Power System

Dispatch And Operations, Ph.D. Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2008.

14

Questions about hydraulic fracturing for natural gas production.

Shawnee, Oklahoma, earthquake 2011 St. Gregory's University

15

Carbon Sequestration 16

Conservation US T&D Losses

1.34 lb CO2/kWh x 250 x 109 kWh = 335 x 109 lb CO2

Karen Forsten, Tomorrow’s T&D, Public Utilities Fortnightly, December 2010, /www.fortnightly.com/pubs/02012010_TomorrowsTD.pdf

17

Costs ($/MWh) for Conserved Electricity

DCI: Demand Conservation Incentive CTP: Cap-and-Trade Program Anthony Paul, Karen Palmer, and Matt Woerman, Supply Curves for Conserved Electricity, RFF DP 11-11, April 2011 , www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-11-11.pdf

18

Demand response 19

Jesse B. Langston, The OGE Energy 2020 Plan - An Innovative Approach to Meeting Tomorrow’s Energy Challenges. 2011 Frontiers of Power Conference, Stillwater, Oklahoma, October 2011.

Carbon-Neutral Generation: Nuclear

Brian Montopoli , Poll: Support for New Nuclear Plants Drops, CBS News, March 22, 2011, www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20046020-503544.html?tag=latest

20

Renewable Generation

Tax credits and incentives Portfolio standards

Net metering

Biomass

Wind

21

Wind vs. Load

Piyasak Poonpun, Effects of New Low Carbon Emission Generators and Energy Storage on Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in Electric Power Systems, PhD Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2009.

22

Solar energy vs. Load clear day

Piyasak Poonpun, Effects of New Low Carbon Emission Generators and Energy Storage on Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in Electric Power Systems, PhD Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2009.

Full sun load

solar

23

Operating Reserves

Operating reserve requirements:

5-12% of forecast load

Capacity credits (California ISO)

– Coal, nuclear, natural gas, oil, hydro: 100%

– Solar 89.5%

– Geothermal 83%

– Wind 23-25.2%

24

Example: Wind vs. CO2

Piyasak Poonpun, Effects of New Low Carbon Emission Generators and Energy Storage on Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in Electric Power Systems, PhD Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2009.

25

Displacement of fossil generation by 300 MW PV, no CO2 price

Piyasak Poonpun, Effects of New Low Carbon Emission Generators and Energy Storage on Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in Electric Power Systems, PhD Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2009.

Complicated by fuel and operating costs, fossil

plant design and ramp rates, and transmission

congestion.

26

Example: changes in costs

Piyasak Poonpun, Effects of New Low Carbon Emission Generators and Energy Storage on Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in Electric Power Systems, PhD Dissertation, Wichita State University, 2009.

-$3,780 -$2,567 -$11,312

•PV is paid locational

marginal price.

•Costs are higher with

net metering.

27

Proposed AEP 765 kV Transmission Overlay

$60B: $0.0024 $/kWh if spread over all US kWh American Electric Power , Interstate Transmission Vision for Wind Integration, www.aep.com/about/i765project/docs/WindTransmissionVisionWhitePaper.pdf

New Transmission is Needed

Bulk Energy Storage Battery storage technologies

Lead Acid

Sodium Sulphur

Zinc Bromine

Vanadium Redox

29

Added Cost of Energy

Piyasak Poonpun, Ward Jewell, “Analysis of the Cost per Kilowatt Hour to Store Electricity.”

IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Volume 23, Issue 2, June 2008, Page(s:529 – 534.

Application: T&D, 2 cycles/day, 250 days/year

Battery costs: 2007 manufacturers’ estimates

30

Electric Energy Storage

Zhouxing Hu, Ward T. Jewell, Optimal Power Flow Analysis of Energy Storage for Congestion Relief, Emissions Reduction, and Cost Savings, 2011 Power Systems Conference and Exhibition, Phoenix, March 2011.

31

Plug Electric Vehicles 32

Electric Vehicles

Chevrolet Volt, US average generation mix CO2 emissions

– 16 kWh electric runs 40 miles • 16 kWh x $0.10/kWh = $1.60 • $1.60 / 40 miles = $0.04 / mile • 1.30 lb CO2/kWh x 16 kWh = 21 lb CO2

– 30 mpg gasoline engine • 40 miles / 30 mpg = 1.3 gallons • 1.3 gallons x $3.50/gallon = $4.55 • $4.55 / 40 miles = $0.11 / mile • 19.4 lb CO2/gallon x 1.3 gallon = 25 lb CO2

33

Source: Renault, www.renault.com/FR/CAPECO2/VEHICULE-ELECTRIQUE/Pages/vehicule-electrique.aspx

New Challenge for the Electric Energy Industry: Electric Vehicle Charging

34

Adapting to changing climate 35

Regional Climate Change Models: Heat

Anthony Arguez, “Changes in Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate.” NOAA National Climatic Data Center

36

Higher average temperature: air and ocean More extreme highs and lows

Now: 394 ppm

B1: low emissions A1B: average emissions

A2: high emissions

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml

37

Anthony Arguez, “Changes in Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate.” NOAA National Climatic Data Center

Climate Change Models: Hurricanes 38

Changing precipitation patterns

National Geographic, ngm.nationalgeographic.com/climateconnections/climate-map

39

Climate Change Models: Precipitation Intensity

Anthony Arguez, “Changes in Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate.” NOAA National Climatic Data Center

40

More severe weather and extreme weather patterns

increased frequency, severity and duration

41

Forecast sea level rise

Martin Vermeer, Stefan Rahmstorf, Global sea level linked to global temperature, PNAS Early Edition, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0907765106

42

Rising sea levels/ land subsidence

http://globalwarmingart.com/wiki/File:Eastern_USA_Sea_Level_Risks_png

43

Guido Franco and Alan H. Sanstad, Climate Change and Electricity Demand In California,

California Climate Change Center , CEC-500-2005-201-SF , February 2006

California Independent System Operator

Changes to energy and peak load consumption patterns

44

Reduced thermal ratings 45

Effects on hydroelectric production

• underproduction

• overproduction

– spilling

• threats to dams

• threats to fish

46

Changing wind and sunlight patterns

BCLM

Charles Curry, “Projected Changes in Surface Winds over Southern BC-Northern Washington Using a Regional Climate Model,” Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling & Analysis

47

Effects on wind and solar energy • Investments in renewables may be threatened

as resources change

• severe weather may damage renewable generators

48

Changing vegetation 49

Changing vegetation 50

Availability of Water Forecast changes in precipitation

Anthony Arguez, “Changes in Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate.” NOAA National Climatic Data Center

51

World Resources Institute - PAGE, 2000, earthtrends.wri.org/maps_spatial/maps_detail_static.php?map_select=265&theme=2

Water affects population migration, changes electric loading.

Water supply, 2025

52

US freshwater consumption by sector

53

Energy Demands on Water Resources. Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water. U.S. Department of Energy (December, 2006).

Water consumption for electricity 10-1000 gallons/MWhe

including geothermal and solar thermal

Energy Demands on Water Resources. Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water. U.S. Department of Energy (December, 2006).

54

Water consumption

for Fuel Extraction,

Processing, Storage

and Transport

Energy Demands on Water Resources. Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water. U.S. Department of Energy (December, 2006).

irrigation

Enhanced oil recovery

Coal gasification

Gas storage in salt cavern

55

Life Cycle Analysis

Cohen Hubal, E. and M. Overcash. Net waste reduction analysis applied to air pollution control technologies, J. Air&Waste Mgmt Assoc. 43(11):1449-1454, 1993.

56

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000

TOTAL MASS CONTROLLED IN AIR EMISSION (lb/hr)

TO

TA

L M

AS

S O

F W

AS

TE

PR

OD

UC

ED

(lb

/hr)

3

1, 2

10, 11

9

8, 7

6

4, 5

14 13

12

Max Control

1: FF 99.7%

2: ESP 99.9%

3: FF & ESP

4: Wet FGD & FF

5: Wet FGD & ESP

6: Wet FGD, FF & ESP

7: LSD & FF

8: LSD & ESP

9: LSD, ESP & FF

10: DSI & FF

11: DSI & ESP

12: SCR, FGD & ESP

13: SCR, FGD & FF

14: SCR, FGD, ESP & FF

Life Cycle Analysis: CO2 emissions

Electricity from Renewable Resources: Status, Prospects, and Impediments, National Academy of Sciences, 2010, http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12619

57

Three significant environmental concerns:

• Mitigating greenhouse gases • includes transportation GHGs

• Adapting to changing climate

• Availability of water.

Planning for these should:

• Consider life cycle costs and benefits

• Optimize • long-term environmental benefits

• electric system reliability

• costs of implementation.

Conclusions

Issues are not intrinsic to markets,

so new regulations are appropriate

Issues, technologies, and regulations

Interact and at times conflict.

Potential costs must be balanced against the benefits of improving, or the costs of not improving, the environment.

Conclusions