The economic costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions under a US national renewable electricity mandate

被引:22
作者
Crane, Keith [1 ]
Curtright, Aimee E. [2 ]
Ortiz, David S. [2 ]
Samaras, Constantine [2 ]
Burger, Nicholas [1 ]
机构
[1] RAND Corp, Arlington, VA 22202 USA
[2] RAND Corp, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
关键词
Renewable portfolio standards; Greenhouse gas emissions; Technology development; PORTFOLIO STANDARD; POWER; TECHNOLOGIES; BENEFITS; SYSTEMS; POLICY; TRADE; WIND;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.02.042
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The electricity sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) in the U.S. Many states have passed and Congress has considered Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), mandates that specific percentages of electricity be generated from renewable resources. We perform a technical and economic assessment and estimate the economic costs and net GHG reductions from a national 25 percent RPS by 2025 relative to coal-based electricity. This policy would reduce GHG emissions by about 670 million metric tons per year, 11 percent of 2008 U.S. emissions. The first 100 million metric tons could be abated for less than $36/metric ton. However, marginal costs climb to $50 for 300 million metric tons and to as much as $70/metric ton to fulfill the RPS. The total economic costs of such a policy are about $35 billion annually. We also examine the cost sensitivity to favorable and unfavorable technology development assumptions. We find that a 25 percent RPS would likely be an economically efficient method for utilities to substantially reduce GHG emissions only under the favorable scenario. These estimates can be compared with other approaches, including increased R&D funding for renewables or deployment of efficiency and/or other low-carbon generation technologies. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2730 / 2739
页数:10
相关论文
共 49 条
[21]   Renewables portfolio standard: a means for trade with electricity from renewable energy sources? [J].
Espey, S .
ENERGY POLICY, 2001, 29 (07) :557-566
[22]  
*GEOTHERMEX, 2004, NEW GEOTH SIT ID QUA
[23]   Life cycle GHG emission analysis of power generation systems: Japanese case [J].
Hondo, H .
ENERGY, 2005, 30 (11-12) :2042-2056
[24]  
*INL, 2006, FEAS ASS WAT EN RES
[25]   Air Emissions Due To Wind And Solar Power [J].
Katzenstein, Warren ;
Apt, Jay .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2009, 43 (02) :253-258
[26]   The influence of large-scale wind power on global climate [J].
Keith, DW ;
DeCarolis, JF ;
Denkenberger, DC ;
Lenschow, DH ;
Malyshev, SL ;
Pacala, S ;
Rasch, PJ .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2004, 101 (46) :16115-16120
[27]   Impacts of a renewable portfolio generation standard on US energy markets [J].
Kydes, Andy S. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2007, 35 (02) :809-814
[28]  
LARIVIERE M, 2009, COMMUNICATION 1130
[29]  
McGowan T. F., 2009, BIOMASS ALTERNATIVE
[30]  
Michaels Robert., 2008, ELECT J, V21, P9, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.TEJ.2008.03.003