Navigant Research Blog

City and Regional Governments Ramp Up Fight Against Climate Change

— June 20, 2016

BiofuelGlobally, climate action and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction programs are becoming increasingly prevalent as electricity costs and climate change become larger areas of concern for residents. In North America alone, cities such as Boston, Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Vancouver, and Toronto have defined ambitious targets for improving sustainability and reducing GHG emissions and energy consumption.

While national aspirations were largely aligned during the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change COP21 Paris conference, the global partnership lacks meaningful implementation and enforcement mechanisms. In the United States in particular, climate change is heavily politicized, and little action is being taken on a national legislative basis to combat the problem.

Climate Action Plans of Selected Cities

Climate Action PLans of Selected Smart Cities_RC blog

(Source: Navigant Research)

To fill the gap from strong city action and low levels of national alignment, several state and provincial governments have recently taken bold action to combat climate change. The province of Ontario unveiled its new sweeping Climate Change Action Plan in June 2016. The initiative is expected to spend up to $8.3 billion on a range of clean technology programs, largely funded from the provinces’ cap-and-trade program. The Climate Change Action plan aims to quickly transition the province toward more energy efficient heating systems, electric and hybrid cars (via a rebate of up to $14,000), promote the conversion of diesel-powered trucks to natural gas, and help the industrial and agricultural sectors adopt low-carbon technologies.

State and Provincial Collaboration

The state of California, well-known for its clean energy leadership, has a cap-and-trade program that is linked to three Canadian provinces: Quebec, Manitoba, and Ontario. Cap-and-trade programs now cover 61.8 million people across North America—38.8 million in California, 13.6 million in Ontario, 8.2 million in Quebec, and 1.2 million in Manitoba. Each of these programs are designed to drive down emissions and set aggressive GHG reduction targets. Over 17% of the combined North American population (354.1 million people, with 318.9 million from the United States and 35.2 million from Canada) is now participating—knowingly or unknowingly—in a cap-and-trade program without any national or regional framework in place. This figure is anticipated to grow significantly as more states and provinces look to fill the void left by national governments by creating enforceable programs that reduce overall GHG emissions levels.

 

Deploying Energy Efficiency to Lower CO2 Emissions and Comply with the Clean Power Plan

— May 17, 2016

Cloud ComputingThis post originally appeared on the Association of Energy Services Professionals (AESP) website.

This article was co-authored by Frank Stern and Rob Neumann. Amanvir Chahal and David Purcell also contributed.

There has been a great deal of discussion on compliance with the Clean Power Plan (CPP). Surprisingly, there is little discussion of specific costs and benefits in leveraging energy efficiency (EE) to reduce CO2 and move toward complying with the CPP. Navigant investigated the effects of deploying additional EE resources to decrease CO2 emissions in two regions—California and PJM [1]. Our analysis shows that deploying additional EE for CPP compliance results in reduced CO2, as would be expected, but it also reduces costs and system congestion. Additional EE can reduce cost to serve load by 3% to 5% in California and PJM, which reduces costs annually up to $825 million in California and $1.5 billion in PJM. Another benefit of deployed EE is system congestion relief, which reduces the cost to serve load—this is important since large, urban utilities are focused on reducing congestion points, and EE can be used as a solution.

CPP and CO2 Reduction Timeline

The CPP has been stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court until final resolution of the case through the federal courts. The U.S. Supreme Court may not have final resolution of the case until 2018, although it could be sooner. Regardless, many states and regions continue to move toward the CPP goals to reduce carbon emissions, plan for an advanced energy economy, and meet cleaner generation goals. It is not known at this time if the deadlines in the CPP will be modified.

Modeling EE for CO2 Reduction

Navigant has been modeling supply resources for many years and has been including EE as a modeled resource. For this analysis, we focused on modeling PJM Transmission Interconnection and the state of California. To establish our EE base case across California and PJM, we included levels of EE modeled in each of Navigant’s most recent PROMOD and POM [2] transmission model runs. The data and assumptions in these runs are updated and verified with industry experts each quarter. Variables in the model include (i) rate of EE adoption over time, (ii) amount of EE compared to new generation, and (iii) varying amounts of EE deployed. EE was modeled across CA and PJM for the three cases (high/medium/low)—each case was run for 2025 and 2030. These years are important since 2025 is the middle of the CPP implementation period and 2030 is the first year of full compliance with the rule (final goal). The low case included a 50% reduction in EE from the base case, while the high case included a 50% increase in EE from the base case—the base case in 2030 is 33 million MWh for PJM and 24 million MWh for California.

Modeled Results

Deployed EE can provide up to 8.8% of California’s and 3.6% of PJM’s overall CPP Compliance goal in 2030. There is also a reduction in the cost to serve generation load based upon deployed EE. In PJM, the cost savings from the low EE case to the high EE case results in over $1.5 billion in savings annually in 2030 (3.6% of total cost to serve load), while in California, the same metric results in up to $825 million in savings annually in 2030 (4.7% of the cost to serve load). To state it in different terms, the cost to increase EE in 2030 to assist meeting CPP requirements is approximately $900 million in PJM and $550 million in California, which results in an EE return on investment of $600 million in PJM and $300 million in California. This lowers 2030 system capacity requirements by 5.6% in PJM and 10.7% in California. The lower savings and returns in California are due to aggressive renewable and EE policies already underway today in advance of CPP compliance.

Another benefit of deployed EE is reduced system congestion, which reduces the cost to serve load. EE will lower the need for new thermal generation on the system and put downward pressure on capacity and resource prices. Our model shows that system congestion is reduced by approximately 1.5% and is seen systemwide. This amounts to cost reductions of more than $765 million a year in PJM and $270 million a year in California. This system congestion finding is important, since there are various efforts underway across the nation to improve congestion (e.g., Con Edison Brooklyn/Queens Demand Management Initiative).

Conclusion

CPP initiatives would benefit greatly by incorporating additional EE into the planning process. EE reduces emissions and systems costs and pushes out the need for large, costly new generation projects. Specifically, we showed that CO2 emissions would be significantly lowered in PJM and California in both 2025 and 2030, while system costs are lowered in PJM and CA by at least 3% and 5%, respectively. This all adds up to longer glide paths for meeting regulatory requirements or when state goals have to be implemented. By including EE as a resource into the resource mix, system planners and environmental offices gain significant benefits in the form of decreasing costs, flattening demand and a zero-emitting resource.


[1] PROMOD IV is a detailed hourly chronological market model that simulates the dispatch and operation of the wholesale electricity market. It replicates the least cost optimization decision criteria used by system operators and utilities in the market while observing generating operational limitations and transmission constraints. The Proprietary Portfolio Optimization Model (POM) is leveraged for regional analysis of regulatory impacts.

[2] PJM coordinates movement of electricity through all or parts of Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia – numerous states and diverse regions.

 

Take Control of Your Future, Part III: Rising Number of Carbon Emissions Reduction Policies and Regulations

— May 16, 2016

Energy CloudMaggie Shober and Rob Neumann also contributed to this post.

My recent blog discussed seven megatrends that are fundamentally changing how we produce and use power. In the second part of the series, I focused on the power of customer choice and changing demands. Here, we will discuss the rising number of carbon emissions reduction policies and how this trend is fundamentally changing the power industry.

What’s Happening with Carbon Emissions Policies Globally?

The long-term impact of the Paris Climate Agreement will be significant. This agreement will focus on limiting global warming to well below 2°C (3.6°F) by the year 2100. Each nation sets its own target for reducing emissions and updates that mark each year. A record number of countries (175) signed the agreement on the first available day. Governments must now ratify and approve the agreement, which could take months or years. The agreement goes into effect once 55 countries representing at least 55% of global emissions formally join. It’s clear that the tone and tenor of the Paris Climate Agreement is providing a guiding light for nations to reduce emissions.

The biggest news was the full commitment of China. The country, together with United States, was one of the first to sign the final Paris Climate Agreement. The United States and China account for nearly 40% of global carbon emissions. It does appear that China is serious about reducing emissions, since the country has made significant investments in renewables, electric vehicles, green cities, and more. Already the world leader in wind power, China is set to overtake Germany this year in solar power (see chart below).

Renewable Energy Growth in Major Economies

Jan Blog 3

(Source: World Resources Institute)

We see that other countries are not waiting. This week, Germany announced a €17 billion ($19.2 billion) campaign—that’s right, billions—to boost energy efficiency. The ultimate goal is to cut the country’s energy consumption in half by 2050. This is part of meeting domestic and Paris Climate Agreement emissions reduction targets. The campaign could prove bearish for European Union (EU) carbon prices if it reduces demand for power and heating in Germany, the top economy (and emitter) of all the EU’s 28 member states.

Many other initiatives at the regional, country, state, and local levels are currently being designed and implemented in support of carbon emissions reductions, accelerated by the agreement. Importantly, the EU is seeking swift approval and implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement at the United Nation’s Bonn Climate Change Conference in Bonn, Germany this week.

U.S. Carbon Regulation

And then we have the Clean Power Plan (CPP). The CPP has been stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court until a final resolution of the case passes through the federal courts. Litigation may not be resolved until 2018, although it’s possible a resolution could be reached sooner. There has been a great deal of discussion on compliance with the CPP. Our analysis continues to show that cost-effective compliance includes a variety of options that are tailored to regional characteristics. A recent deep dive by Navigant into a southeastern state with modest renewable resources showed that trading with other states and developing energy efficiency programs and portfolios are key strategies for reducing overall compliance costs. Compliance strategies depend on existing resources; older coal resources on the margin for retirement are able to get a large bang for their buck on the emissions balancing sheet through replacement with gas, renewables, and energy efficiency.

Navigant also investigated the effects of deploying additional energy efficiency resources in order to decrease CO2 emissions in two regions: California and PJM. We found that additional energy efficiency reduces CO2 emissions, overall cost of compliance, and system congestion. The cost to serve load is reduced by 3%-5% in California and PJM. System congestion relief is also likely to occur, which further reduces the cost to serve load. This last point is important, since large, urban utilities are focused on reducing congestion points—and energy efficiency can be used as a solution.

Other Ongoing Developments

Even though the CPP is on hold, many individual states, cities, and utilities continue to move toward the CPP goals to reduce carbon emissions, plan for an advanced energy economy, and meet cleaner generation goals. The CPP parameters are being used as a guide for emissions reductions:

  • Last month, Maryland lawmakers approved the Clean Energy Jobs Act of 2016 (SB 921) by large majorities in both houses, increasing the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to 25% by 2020.
  • As part of the New York Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) proceedings, the New York Public Service Commission introduced an order that requires placing a value on carbon emissions, focusing on distributed generation portfolios, and compensating customers for their distributed electricity generation.
  • Over the past year, six states led by Tennessee (plus Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, and Pennsylvania), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and a few other national organizations have been developing a National Energy Efficiency Registry (NEER) to allow states to track and trade energy efficiency emissions credits for CPP and emissions compliance purposes.
  • Last week, San Diego announced its pledge to get 100% of its energy from clean and renewable power with a Climate Action Plan that sets the boldest citywide clean energy law in the United States. With this announcement, San Diego is the largest U.S. city to join the growing trend of cities choosing clean energy. Already, at least 12 other U.S. cities, including San Francisco, San Jose, Burlington (Vermont), and Aspen, have committed to 100% clean energy. Globally, numerous cities have committed to 100% clean energy, including Copenhagen, Denmark; Munich, Germany; and the Isle of Wight, England.
  • Meanwhile, many utilities are decommissioning or converting their existing coal plants and investing in utility-scale renewables, as well as distributed energy resources. As example, AEP is in the process of decommissioning 11 coal plants, representing approximately 6,500 MW of coal-fired generating capacity as part of its plan to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. The company is simultaneously making significant investments in renewables, with a total capacity of close to 4,000 MW by mid-2016.

What Does This All Mean?

The sustainability objectives of government, policymakers, utilities, and their customers are more closely aligned than ever before. In my last blog, I discussed how customer choice and changing customer demands are shifting toward supporting sustainability. States and regulators will continue to discuss how sustainable targets can be met without affecting jobs and the access to safe, reliable, and affordable power. And utilities will continue to evolve to support cleaner, more distributed, and more intelligent energy generation, distribution, and consumption.

Recommended action items for states and utilities include:

  • Understand the possibilities, costs, and full impacts of low-carbon generation and distributed energy resources (energy efficiency, demand response, and others).
  • Implement a workable framework and develop an integrated plan to move toward lower emissions goals, since it’s likely that decreased emission requirements will be in place in the near future.
  • Leverage existing state and neighboring utility designs and efforts to develop joint plans, policies, and goals.
  • Implement (pilot) initiatives that include renewable energy and other low-carbon generation into a reduced emissions framework while also incorporating energy efficiency and distributed generation as resources into the decreased emissions planning process.

This post is the third in a series in which I will discuss each of the megatrends and the impacts (“so what?”) in more detail. My next blog will cover shifting power-generating sources. Stay tuned.

Learn more about our clients, projects, solution offerings, and team at Navigant Energy Practice Overview.

 

Take Control of Your Future, Part I: Megatrends in the Utilities Industry

— April 29, 2016

Energy CloudThe pace and impact of change in the utilities industry is unrelenting. Each of the following megatrends is changing the way we produce and use power globally. Together, these megatrends are revolutionizing the industry.

  1. The power of customer choice and changing demands: More customers want to control their electricity usage and spend, as well as when and what type of power they buy. Customers want the ability to self-generate and sell that power back to the grid. Amazon, Apple, Cisco, Google, Honda, Walmart, and many other large energy buyers have increased their focus on sustainable energy solutions. This trend, in turn, is forcing new power purchase agreements with the incumbent utilities in order to minimize their risk of losing significant load. For example, a second (Google was the first) major technology company, Cisco, has confirmed that it is using Duke Energy’s Green Source Rider to provide clean energy for its North Carolina operations.
  2. Rising number of carbon emissions reduction policies and regulations: The impact of COP21 will be significant. Navigant believes that the “hold” on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is temporary, and state governments and utilities are not waiting. They are taking actions now to be compliant. In fact, sustainability objectives between government, policymakers, utilities, and their customers are much more closely aligned than ever before.
  3. Shifting power-generating sources: U.S. electric-generating facilities expect to add more than 26 GW of utility-scale generating capacity to the power grid during 2016. Most of these additions will come from three resources: solar (9.5 GW), natural gas (8.0 GW), and wind (6.8 GW), which together make up 93% of the expected total additions. Existing assets (coal, but also nuclear) are devaluing and are at risk of becoming stranded as source shifting continues and newer natural gas and renewable generation sources come online.
  4. Delivering shareholder value through mergers and acquisitions (M&A): New industry ventures and M&A are happening at a rapid pace. Exelon’s acquisition of Pepco, Southern Company acquiring SoCoGas, Duke acquiring Piedmont Gas, Emera acquiring TECO, etc. In search for shareholder value through scale and increased synergies, this is a path that utilities will continue to explore.
  5. Regionalizing of energy resources (interstate, north-south, global): In order to provide reliable and affordable power, more energy resources are being regionalized. For example, PacifiCorp and Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and, later this year, NV Energy is joining California ISO. One of the main drivers is to achieve the benefits to manage local differences with regard to renewables, wind, and solar. Another example is Florida Power & Light’s (FPL’s) investment in natural gas exploration and production companies in Oklahoma and gas transmission pipelines to secure fuels for its natural gas combined cycle plants in Florida. Meanwhile, the global availability and movement of natural gas has created an abundance of natural gas. Some of the world’s biggest entrants into the growing global gas market have considered investing in power plants and other big projects now that their multibillion-dollar exporter terminals are about to open, executives said at the Columbia Global Energy Summit on April 27.
  6. Merging industries and new entrants: Several industries, including utilities, oil and gas (O&G), technology, manufacturers, OEMs, etc., are merging around areas like renewables, distributed energy resources (DER), energy management, smarter cities, and transportation. Navigant sees many cross-industry movements, and one of them is increased crossover investments between the electric utility and O&G industries. We see utilities investing in natural gas assets. And we see oil companies making investments in utilities. We also see both making investments in new areas of opportunity, like renewables, DER (distributed generation, energy efficiency, demand response, energy efficiency, etc.), transportation, smart infrastructure and cities, and energy management. That’s why the announcement in April by French supermajor Total is not a surprise to me. Total announced the creation of a Gas, Renewables and Power division, which it said will help drive its ambition to become a top renewables and electricity trading player within 20 years. According to a statement by the supermajor, “Gas, Renewables and Power will spearhead Total’s ambitions in the electricity value chain by expanding in gas midstream and downstream, renewable energies and energy efficiency.”
  7. The emerging Energy Cloud: Old infrastructure is being replaced and geared toward an increasingly decentralized and smarter power grid architecture known as the Energy Cloud. The Energy Cloud is an emerging platform of two-way power flows and intelligent grid architecture expected to ultimately deliver higher quality power. While this shift poses significant risks to incumbent power utilities, it also offers major opportunities in a market that is becoming more open, competitive, and innovative. Fueled by steady increases in DER, this shift will affect policy and regulation, business models, and the way the grid is operated in every single region of the world.

These megatrends cannot be underestimated. They are accelerating transformation in the energy industry, enabling the entry of new players, putting pressure on incumbent players, and altering traditional strategies and business models. Organizations will need to adapt, and there will be winners and losers as this transformation takes shape. My advice to senior leadership of energy companies is to take an integrated, holistic view of the opportunities and challenges that are flowing from these megatrends. Only then will you be able understand the full impacts and path forward. And that is the only way you can really take control of your future.

This post is the first in a series in which I will discuss each of the megatrends and the impacts (“so what?”) in more detail. Stay tuned.

Learn more about our clients, projects, solution offerings, and team at Navigant Energy Practice Overview.

 

Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date

Tags

Clean Transportation, Electric Vehicles, Finance & Investing, Policy & Regulation, Renewable Energy, Smart Energy Practice, Smart Energy Program, Smart Transportation Program, Transportation Efficiencies, Utility Innovations

By Author


{"userID":"","pageName":"Carbon Emissions","path":"\/tag\/carbon-emissions","date":"6\/25\/2016"}