Water Constraints in an Electric Sector Capacity Expansion Model

Macknick, Jordan; Cohen, Stuart; Newmark, R. L.; Martinez, Andrew; Sullivan, Patrick; Tidwell, V. C.

doi:10.2172/1215271

Cited by 21 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies indicate the importance of resource redistribution in alleviating localized resource constraints, including via trade [68,93,102] and electricity transmission [164][165][166], and water conveyance [62]. Thus, infrastructure that allows for the movement of commodities and resources from resource-rich to resource-poor locations stands out as one of the most important nexus solutions.…”

Section: Resource Redistributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Solutions for the Water-Energy-Land Nexus: Are Global Models Rising to the Challenge?

Johnson

Burek

Byers

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing human demands for water, energy, food and materials, are expected to accentuate resource supply challenges over the coming decades. Experience suggests that long-term strategies for a single sector could yield both trade-offs and synergies for other sectors. Thus, long-term transition pathways for linked resource systems should be informed using nexus approaches. Global integrated assessment models can represent the synergies and trade-offs inherent in the exploitation of water, energy and land (WEL) resources, including the impacts of international trade and climate policies. In this study, we review the current state-of-the-science in global integrated assessment modeling with an emphasis on how models have incorporated integrated WEL solutions. A large-scale assessment of the relevant literature was performed using online databases and structured keyword search queries. The results point to the following main opportunities for future research and model development: (1) improving the temporal and spatial resolution of economic models for the energy and water sectors;(2) balancing energy and land requirements across sectors; (3) integrated representation of the role of distribution infrastructure in alleviating resource challenges; (4) modeling of solution impacts on downstream environmental quality; (5) improved representation of the implementation challenges stemming from regional financial and institutional capacity; (6) enabling dynamic multi-sectoral vulnerability and adaptation needs assessment; and (7) the development of fully-coupled assessment frameworks based on consistent, scalable, and regionally-transferable platforms. Improved database management and computational power are needed to address many of these modeling challenges at a global-scale. IntroductionWater, energy and land (WEL) represent fundamental resources needed for human survival and are critical for supporting economic development and ecosystem services, such as flood control, carbon sequestration and biodiversity. Socioeconomic and climate trends are rapidly increasing global demands for WEL resources. Based on the "middle-of-the-road" Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2) scenario in which population reaches about 9 billion in 2050, food demand is projected to increase on average 74% (59-98%) from 2005 to 2050 [1], primary energy supply will increase on average 92% (81-113%) [2], agricultural land is projected to increase on average 5% (3-7%) [3], and global water demand is projected to increase about 50% [4,5]. Meanwhile, WEL resources are regionally constrained for physical or economic reasons and several global "mega-trends", such as climate change, urbanization, and globalization, are expected to have regional impacts that may either exacerbate or alleviate resource constraints and the associated supply challenges [6]. There is an urgent need to better understand the impacts and vulnerability of human populations and ecosystems to future socioeconomic and climatic change as well as to identify sustainable strategies for m...

show abstract

Section: Resource Redistributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Solutions for the Water-Energy-Land Nexus: Are Global Models Rising to the Challenge?

Johnson

Burek

Byers

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Electric sector water use is estimated within ReEDS based on the cost, performance, and water-use characteristics of different generation types and cooling system technologies (Macknick et al 2015). We distinguish between water consumption (removal without return to source) and water withdrawals (removal with return to source).…”

Section: Environmental and Health Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the costs and benefits of US renewable portfolio standards

Wiser

Mai

Millstein

et al. 2017

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Renewable portfolio standards (RPS) exist in 29 US states and the District of Columbia. This article summarizes the first national-level, integrated assessment of the future costs and benefits of existing RPS policies; the same metrics are evaluated under a second scenario in which widespread expansion of these policies is assumed to occur. Depending on assumptions about renewable energy technology advancement and natural gas prices, existing RPS policies increase electric system costs by as much as $31 billion, on a present-value basis over 2015−2050. The expanded renewable deployment scenario yields incremental costs that range from $23 billion to $194 billion, depending on the assumptions employed. The monetized value of improved air quality and reduced climate damages exceed these costs. Using central assumptions, existing RPS policies yield $97 billion in air-pollution health benefits and $161 billion in climate damage reductions. Under the expanded RPS case, health benefits total $558 billion and climate benefits equal $599 billion. These scenarios also yield benefits in the form of reduced water use. RPS programs are not likely to represent the most cost effective path towards achieving air quality and climate benefits. Nonetheless, the findings suggest that US RPS programs are, on a national basis, cost effective when considering externalities.

show abstract

“…Shindell 2015). The basic approach used for estimating water use impacts has also been applied in multiple studies Macknick et al 2012;Macknick et al 2015;Rogers et al 2013). The same is true for our assessments of gross RE-workforce and economic development impacts (Bamufleh et al 2013;Croucher 2012;Flores et al 2014;Keyser et al 2014;Lantz and Tegen 2008;Loomis and Carter 2011;Navigant 2013;Slattery et al 2011;Steinberg et al 2012;You et al 2012), and natural gas price impacts (Fischer 2009;Wiser and Bolinger 2007).…”

Section: Metrics To Estimate Electric System and Consumer Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Prospective Analysis of the Costs, Benefits, and Impacts of U.S. Renewable Portfolio Standards

Mai

Wiser

Barbose

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PREFACE This is one report in a series that explores the costs, benefits, and other impacts of state renewable portfolio standards (RPS), both retrospectively and prospectively. The first report, A Survey of State-Level Cost and Benefit Estimates of Renewable Portfolio Standards, published in 2014, comprehensively summarized historical RPS compliance costs, drawing in part on estimates developed by utilities and state regulatory agencies. The study also reviewed analyses of the broader societal benefits and impacts of several states' RPS policies, typically conducted for or by the regulatory agencies or RPS administrators in those states. However, the small number of such studies, and their widely varying methods and scopes, ultimately limited the ability to compare benefits across states or to generalize beyond the specific studies performed. That limitation set the stage for future reports.The second report in the series, A Retrospective Analysis of the Benefits and Impacts of U.S. Renewable Portfolio Standards, published in January 2016, analyzed historical benefits and impacts of renewable energy (RE) used to meet all state RPS policies, in aggregate, employing a consistent and well-vetted set of methods and data sets. The analysis focuses on three specific benefits: air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. It also analyzes three other impacts: gross job additions, wholesale electricity market price suppression, and natural gas price suppression. These are an important subset, but by no means a comprehensive set, of all possible effects associated with RPS policies. That report did not include a comparison of costs and benefits of renewables used to meet RPS policies, and nor did it assess the potential costs, benefits, and impacts prospectively based on future increases in RPS targets.The present report fills that gap by evaluating the future costs, benefits, and other impacts of renewable energy used to meet current state RPS polices. It also examines a future scenario where RPSs are expanded. The analysis examines changes in electric system costs and retail electricity prices, which include all fixed and operating costs, including capital costs for all renewable, non-renewable, and supporting (e.g., transmission and storage) electric sector infrastructure; fossil fuel, uranium, and biomass fuel costs; and plant operations and maintenance expenditures. The analysis uses the same framework as the second report to analyze three specific benefits: air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. It also analyzes two other impacts, RE workforce and economic development, and natural gas price suppression.The terminology applied in this series does not align precisely with the traditional concepts of costs and benefits, but rather is a function of how RPS programs have often been evaluated in practice. This analysis series, particularly the present report, evaluates renewable energy used to meet RPS policies in terms of costs, benefits, and other impacts:

show abstract

Water Constraints in an Electric Sector Capacity Expansion Model

Cited by 21 publications

References 17 publications

Integrated Solutions for the Water-Energy-Land Nexus: Are Global Models Rising to the Challenge?

Integrated Solutions for the Water-Energy-Land Nexus: Are Global Models Rising to the Challenge?

Assessing the costs and benefits of US renewable portfolio standards

A Prospective Analysis of the Costs, Benefits, and Impacts of U.S. Renewable Portfolio Standards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About