| PUBLICATIONS | | Filtered by Electricity | | | | | Sort by: Title | Date | Results per page: |
| | Renewable Electricity Policy, Intermittency, and Cost-Effectiveness | | Harrison Fell and Joshua Linn | | Journal of Environmental Economics and Management | forthcoming | Related Discussion Paper 12-54 | | | | | | Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Analysis Deconstructed: Changing Assumptions, Changing Results | | Blair Beasley, Matthew Woerman, Anthony Paul, Dallas Burtraw, Karen L. Palmer | | RFF Discussion Paper 13-10 | April 2013 | | Abstract: Several recent studies have used simulation models to quantify the potential effects of recent environmental regulations on power plants, including the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), one of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s most expensive regulations. These studies have produced inconsistent results about the effects on the industry, making general conclusions difficult. We attempt to reconcile these differences by representing the variety of assumptions in these studies within a common modeling platform. We find that the assumptions, and their differences from the way MATS will be implemented, make a substantial impact on projected retirement of coal-fired capacity and generation, investments that are required, and emissions reductions. Almost uniformly, the actual regulation, when examined in its final form and in isolation, provides more flexibility than is represented in most models. We find this leads to a smaller impact on the composition of the electricity generating fleet than most studies have predicted. | | | | What Changes Energy Consumption, and for How Long? New Evidence from the 2001 Brazilian Electricity Crisis | | Francois Gerard | | RFF Discussion Paper 13-06 | March 2013 | | Abstract: There is little evidence from impact evaluation studies of ambitious residential energy conservation programs, especially in developing countries. In this paper, I investigate the short- and long-term impacts of the most ambitious electricity conservation program to date. This was an innovative program of private incentives and conservation appeals implemented by the Brazilian government in 2001-2002 in response to supply shortages of over 20%. I nd that the program reduced average electricity consumption per customer by 25% over a nine-month period in affected areas. Importantly, the program reduced consumption by 12% in the long run. Such persistent effects, which arose mostly from behavioral adjustments, may substantially improve the cost-effectiveness of ambitious conservation programs. Finally, I show that a price elasticity estimated out-of-crisis would have to be increased fivefold to rationalize conservation efforts by the private incentives alone. Appeals to social preferences likely amplify consumers' responsiveness in times of crisis. | | | | Cost-effectiveness and Economic Incidence of a Clean Energy Standard | | Bryan K. Mignone, Thomas Alfstad, Aaron Bergman, Kenneth Dubin, Richard Duke, Paul Friley, Andrew Martinez, Matthew Mowers, Karen Palmer, Anthony Paul, Sharon Showalter, Daniel Steinberg, Matt Woerman, Frances Wood | | Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy | September 2012 | Vol. 1, No. 3 | pp. 59-86 | | | | | | Regulating Greenhouse Gases from Coal Power Plants under the Clean Air Act | | Joshua Linn, Erin Mastrangelo, Dallas Burtraw | | RFF Discussion Paper 13-05 | February 2013 | | Abstract: The Clean Air Act has assumed the central role in US climate policy, directing the development of regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal-fired power plants. This paper examines the operation of coal-fired generating units over 25 years to estimate the marginal costs and potential magnitude of emissions reductions from improving their efficiency. We find that a 10 percent increase in coal prices causes a 0.2 to 0.5 percent heat rate reduction, broadly consistent with engineering assessments. We also find that coal prices have a significant effect on utilization. The results are used to compare cost-effectiveness of alternative policies. | | | | Designing Renewable Electricity Policies to Reduce Emissions | | Harrison Fell, Joshua Linn, Clayton Munnings | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-54 | December 2012 | | Related journal article | | Abstract: A variety of renewable electricity policies to promote investment in wind, solar, and other types of renewable generators exist across the United States. The federal renewable energy investment tax credit, the federal renewable energy production tax credit, and state renewable portfolio standards are among the most notable. Whether the benefits of promoting new technology and reducing pollution emissions from the power sector justify these policies’ costs has been the subject of considerable debate. We argue in this paper that the debate is misguided because it does not consider two important interactions between renewable electricity generators and the rest of the power system. First, the value of electricity from a renewable generators depends on the generation and investment it displaces. Second, a large increase in renewable generation can reduce electricity prices, increasing consumption and emissions from fossil generators, and offsetting some of the environmental benefits of the policies. Two policy conclusions follow. First, existing renewable electricity policies can be redesigned to promote investment in the highest-value generators, which can greatly reduce the cost of achieving a given emissions reduction. Second, subsidies financed out of general tax revenue reduce emissions less than subsidies financed by charges to electricity consumers. | | | | Policies to Encourage Home Energy Efficiency Improvements: Comparing Loans, Subsidies, and Standards | | Margaret A. Walls | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-47 | December 2012 | | Abstract: Residential buildings are responsible for approximately 20 percent of U.S. energy consumption, and single-family homes alone account for about 16 percent. Older homes are less energy efficient than newer ones, and although many experts have identified upgrades and improvements that can yield significant energy savings at relatively low, or even negative, cost, it has proved difficult to spur most homeowners to make these investments. In this study, I analyze the energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) impacts from three policies aimed at improving home energy efficiency: a subsidy for the purchase of efficient space heating, cooling, and water heating equipment; a loan for the same purchases; and efficiency standards for such equipment. I use a version of the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System, NEMS-RFF, to compute the energy and CO2 effects and standard formulas in economics to calculate the welfare costs of the policies. I find that the loan is quite cost-effective but provides only a very small reduction in emissions and energy use. The subsidy and the standard are both more costly but generate emissions reductions seven times larger than the loan. The subsidy promotes consumer adoption of very high-efficiency equipment, whereas the standard leads to purchases of equipment that just reach the standard. The discount rate used to discount energy savings from the policies has a large effect on the welfare cost estimates. | | | | Modeling a Clean Energy Standard for Electricity: Policy Design Implications for Emissions, Supply, Prices, and Regions Energy Economics | | Anthony Paul, Karen Palmer and Matt Woerman | | Energy Economics | forthcoming | Related Discussion Paper 11-35 | | | | | | Clean Air Regulations and the Electricity Sector | | Karen L. Palmer, Dallas Burtraw, Anthony Paul, Blair Beasley, Matthew Woerman | | Resources | 2012 (181) | | | | | | Modeling the Electricity Sector: A Summary of Recent Analyses of New EPA Regulations | | Blair Beasley, Daniel F. Morris | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-52 | November 2012 | | Abstract: Several different economic models have been applied to try to understand how new regulations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could impact coal-fired generation in the United States as well as the electricity system as a whole. This paper provides an overview of many of the key studies and the models used to analyze the potential impacts of EPA’s rules. The regulations surveyed include the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), the proposed Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) rule, and the proposed Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) rule. The models generally agree that these regulations will result in coal plant retirements, though there is far less agreement on how much generation may retire. Assumptions about the price of natural gas and the expected stringency of regulations play a key role in determining modeling results. The models provide useful guidance for policymakers when considering the potential impact of EPA regulation. | | | | US Status on Climate Change Mitigation | | Dallas Burtraw, Matthew Woerman | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-48 | October 2012 | | Abstract: In 2009, President Obama pledged that, by 2020, the United States would achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of 17 percent from 2005 levels. With the failure of Congress to adopt comprehensive climate legislation in 2010, the feasibility of the pledge was put in doubt. However, we find the United States is near to reaching this goal; currently, the country is on course to achieve reductions of 16.3 percent from 2005 levels in 2020. Three factors contribute to this outcome: greenhouse gas regulations under the Clean Air Act, secular trends including changes in relative fuel prices and energy efficiency, and subnational efforts. Nonetheless, global emissions likely will be greater than if comprehensive climate legislation had passed because of the absence of offsets, and at this point the United States is expected to fail to meet its financing commitments under the Copenhagen Accord for 2020. | | | | The Effect of Natural Gas Supply on Retail Electricity Prices | | Karen L. Palmer, Dallas Burtraw, Matthew Woerman, Blair Beasley | | Issue Brief 12-05 | August 2012 | | | | | | The Health Effects of Coal Electricity Generation in India | | Maureen L. Cropper, Shama Gamkhar, Kabir Malik, Alex Limonov, Ian Partridge | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-25 | June 2012 | | Abstract: To help inform pollution control policies in the Indian electricity sector we estimate the health damages associated with particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from individual coal-fired power plants. We calculate the damages per ton of pollutant for each of 89 plants and compute total damages in 2008, by pollutant, for 63 plants. We estimate health damages by combining data on power plant emissions of particulate matter, SO2 and NOx with reduced-form intake fraction models that link emissions to changes in population-weighted ambient concentrations of fine particles. Concentration-response functions for fine particles from Pope et al. (2002) are used to estimate premature cardiopulmonary deaths associated with air emissions for persons 30 and older. Our results suggest that 75 percent of premature deaths are associated with fine particles that result from SO2 emissions. After characterizing the distribution of premature mortality across plants we calculate the health benefits and cost-per-life saved of the flue-gas desulfurization unit installed at the Dahanu power plant in Maharashtra and the health benefits of coal washing at the Rihand power plant in Uttar Pradesh. | | | | Secular Trends, Environmental Regulations and Electricity Markets | | Dallas Burtraw, Karen Palmer, Anthony Paul and Matt Woerman | | The Electricity Journal | July 2012 | Vol 25, No. 6 | pp. 35-47 | Related Discussion Paper 12-15 | | | | | | The Hidden Costs of Power: Health Effects of Coal Electricity Generation in India | | Maureen L. Cropper, Kabir Malik | | Resources | 2012 (180) | | | | | | The True Cost of Electric Power: An Inventory of Methodologies to Support Future Decisionmaking in Comparing the Cost and Competitiveness of Electricity Generation Technologies | | Dallas Burtraw, Alan J. Krupnick, Gabriel Sampson | | RFF Report | June 2012 | | | | | | Summary for Policymakers: The True Cost of Electric Power | | Dallas Burtraw, Alan J. Krupnick | | RFF Report | June 2012 | | | | | | For the Benefit of California Electricity Ratepayers: Electricity Sector Options for the Use of Allowance Value Created under California’s Cap-and-Trade Program | | Dallas Burtraw, David McLaughlin, Sarah Jo Szambelan | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-24 | May 2012 | | Abstract: California will implement a cap-and-trade program to limit emissions of carbon dioxide covering industry and electricity sector emissions in 2013, expanding to cover transportation and natural gas in 2015. Although cap-and-trade would increase annual electricity costs for the average customer by $30 to nearly $100, the allowance value created under the program can offset all of these costs and even reduce electricity bills. California’s Air Resources Board has directed electricity regulators to ensure this allowance value is used for the benefit of electricity ratepayers. This paper surveys four options: (1) reducing electricity bills; (2) sending equivalent revenue directly to households in proportion to costs; or (3) as equal payments per customer account; and (4) making investments to improve the electricity system and help reduce emissions. Under special consideration is this question: Who will receive the allowance value associated with the electricity sector? We explore the implications of three specific proposals. | | | | Hearing on The Clean Energy Standard Act of 2012 | | Karen L. Palmer | | U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources | 5/17/2012 | | | | | | Reliability in the Electricity Industry under New Environmental Regulations | | Dallas Burtraw, Karen L. Palmer, Anthony Paul, Blair Beasley, Matthew Woerman | | RFF Discussion Paper 12-18 | May 2012 | | Abstract: Implementation of new environmental regulations in the electricity industry has triggered concerns about system reliability. We find these regulations are unlikely to create the shock to the system as some worry. They lead to little change in generation capacity. The large costs associated with investments in pollution control technologies are partially offset by a decrease in the cost burden associated with tradable emissions allowances. The combined effects contribute to a 1 percent increase in retail electricity prices and a decrease in producer profits of about $3–$5 billion in 2020. Though it varies across scenarios and regions, over the simulation horizon, consumers pay approximately 70 percent of total costs. In 2020, for example, total annual costs are between $6.6 billion and $7.1 billion. The investment in pollution controls leads to substantial reductions in emissions of mercury and sulfur dioxide. | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
| FILTER PUBLICATIONS | | By Topic | | | By Type | | | By Author | | | | Display All Publications |
|
|
|
|
|