Distributed Energy Generation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Distributed Energy Generation DISTRIBUTED ENERGY GENERATION SYSTEMS BASED ON RENEWABLE ENERGY AND NATURAL GAS BLENDING: NEW BUSINESS MODELS FOR ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, ELECTRICITY MARKET DESIGN AND REGULATORY INNOVATION by Joseph Nyangon A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Energy and Environmental Policy Fall 2017 © 2017 Joseph Nyangon All Rights Reserved DISTRIBUTED ENERGY GENERATION SYSTEMS BASED ON RENEWABLE ENERGY AND NATURAL GAS BLENDING: NEW BUSINESS MODELS FOR ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, ELECTRICITY MARKET DESIGN AND REGULATORY INNOVATION by Joseph Nyangon Approved: __________________________________________________________ John Byrne, Ph.D. Professor in charge of the dissertation on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: __________________________________________________________ Syed Ismat Shah, Ph.D. Interim Director of the Energy and Environmental Policy Program Approved: __________________________________________________________ Babatunde A. Ogunnaike, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Engineering Approved: __________________________________________________________ Ann L. Ardis, Ph.D. Senior Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: __________________________________________________________ John Byrne, Ph.D. Professor in charge of dissertation I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: __________________________________________________________ J. Mack Wathen MBA Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: __________________________________________________________ Steven Cohen, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: __________________________________________________________ William Latham III, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation represents a crystallization of my research journey in the domains of distributed utilities and renewable electrcity integration originally conceived almost six years ago. It began when I was a graduate student at Columbia Universitys’s School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA). A fortunate involment with the university’s Earth Institute practicum program featuring lectures by Professors Jeffrey Sachs, Steven Cohen, and Vijay Modi of mechanical engineering department provided my first exposure to how changes in business practices and technological innovations are reshaping the electricity sector. To my complete surprise, that exposure radically undermined some of my basic conceptions about the utility landscape and the interconnected business model innovation, technological advancements, customer preferences, and market forces that are driving this transformation. Whatever their pedagogic utility, those conceptions drawn from a misconception that distributed utilities were costlier and thus could not compete effectively with the centralized utility network did not at all fit the enterprise that historical data was already displaying. The result was a dramatic shift in my career trajectory, a shift from approaching this problem as a technological efficiency dilemma, to an interdisciplinary policy, engineering, and economics challenge. Without any doubt the ideas set forth in this dissertation substantially benefited from discussion and critique involving many scholars who are not readily identifiable by name. I sincerely thank my resourceful and indefatigable committee members who helped me to crystallize issues at the outset of this study. My primary advisor, and iv mentor at the University of Delaware, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy, Professor John Byrne planted in me a curious search for scholarly direction. He has supported my work since our first meeting and set me to reading works of prominent theorists of political economy, politics of energy transitions and post-modernity notably Jacques Ellul, Thomas S. Kuhn, Lewis Mumford, David Ricardo, Joseph A. Schumpeter, Langdon Winner, and Joan Martinez-Alier. In addition, the long discussions, helpful suggestions, and enlightened discourse with Professor Byrne have strengthened the narrative of this dissertation substantially, shaped my conception of what the business incentives of distribution utilities ideas can be, and continue to provide a powerful—indeed, inspirational—model for me. Thank you for your continued support, insightful guidance, and patience over the past four years. Professor William Latham introduced me to advanced econometric modeling of energy systems and provided valuable insights in this area which helped to sharpen the analysis and conclusions. J. Mark Wathen’s comments polished my dissertation a lot. Because he understands how challenging energy transformation is to the electric industry than I do, I could adjust my discussion of the results and policy implications to reflect the raw reality of these issues to utility business. Professor Steven Cohen agreed to join my committee despite his busy schedule at the helm of the management of Columbia University’s Earth Institute. He has been a mentor since we met during my studies at Columbia, and my thinking on regulatory innovation—and on so much else—has benefited immensely from our conversations over the years. Finally, I acknowledge the privileged consultations and advice which I have shared with the remaining faculty throughout my four years here at CEEP—an institution that have helped give form to my thought. v I owe my girlfriend, Jen, a great debt of gratitude. She has both challenged and inspired me in equal measure and her keen vision and intellectual energy are without equivalent. As the youngest in a family of many firsts and strong academic performance, my parents, brothers, and sisters have been a locus of endless love, creativity, and unwavering support and encouragement as they lead by example. Finally, I would like to thank all my colleagues at CEEP especially Job Taminiau, Mayuri Utturkar, Kathleen Saul, Joohee Lee, Jeongseok Seo, Jiajing (Athena) Bi, Nabeel Al Abbas, Soojin Shin, Benjamin Attia, and everyone I met along the way who have been a vital source of support and encouragement. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................... xii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ xiv LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................... xix ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... xxv Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Statement of Research .............................................................................. 1 1.2 Evolution of Electric Power Sector in the United States ......................... 3 1.2.1 Signposts of Distributed Electricity Generation Expansion ........ 5 1.2.2 Emerging Challenges of Distributed Generation on Bulk Power System ....................................................................................... 9 1.3 The Case for a More Distributed Energy Future ................................... 20 1.4 Research Design and Methodology ....................................................... 21 1.5 Organization of Chapters ....................................................................... 22 2 TRANSFORMING THE U.S. ELECTRICITY SYSTEM: BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION ............................................................................. 25 2.1 Background ............................................................................................ 25 2.1.1 Overview of Utility Sector in the United States ........................ 25 2.1.2 Disruptive Triggers in the Utility Industry ................................ 32 2.1.3 Distributed Generation Narratology: The Détente for Natural Gas and Renewable Energy Blending ..................................... 36 2.1.4 Benefits of Gas-Renewable Energy Partnering ......................... 42 2.1.4.1 Carbon Mitigation ....................................................... 49 2.1.4.2 Energy System Integration .......................................... 50 2.1.4.3 Synergistic Benefits of NG-RE Hybrid Power Generation Opportunities ......................................... 52 2.2 The Battle Over Centralization of Economic and Physical Control of Electricity Generation ......................................................................... 57 2.3 A Brief History of the Dominant U.S. Energy Policy Paradigm ........... 59 2.3.1 Defending the Centralized Energy Policy Approach in an Increasingly Complex and Changing Environment ................ 62 vii 2.3.2 Exclusion of Alternative Voices ...............................................
Recommended publications
  • Duke Energy Profile
    Duke Energy Duke Energy, based in North Carolina, is the largest electric utility in the United States and the company emits more carbon pollution than any other utility. Duke also ranks first in fossil fuel generation and second in coal-fired generation. The majority of Duke’s business is in regulated, monopoly utilities in six states: North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky. While Duke also owns a commercial arm that has invested in wind and solar power that it sells electricity to other utilities, Duke’s electricity customers in its regulated territory receive an electricity mix that contains next to zero renewable energy. The company has shown little appetite for change. In fact, regulatory documents show it intends to have only 4% renewable power in North Carolina by 2029. Duke’s fossil and nuclear-dominated strategy have led to a series of scandals in recent years both for its customers and the environment. Duke’s coal ash waste has become a systemic disaster in the Carolinas, culminating in the 2014 coal ash spill on the Dan River. Nuclear construction projects in the Carolinas and particularly Florida have been beset by problems, costing ratepayers billions of dollars. Duke has protected itself from stricter oversight in its regulated operations by contributing heavily to the state and federal politicians that control its destiny, pouring millions of dollars into campaign contributions and lobbying. Despite massive pressures facing the electric power sector to adapt to technological change that is ushering in a new wave of energy efficiency, rooftop solar power, and distributed energy storage, Duke has yet to show much of an appetite for change.
    [Show full text]
  • (Nxpowerlite).Ppt
    MAP/Ming Professorship, Engineering School, Stanford University, 29 March 2007 CEE 173L/273L: Advanced Energy End-Use Efficiency Public Lectures in Advanced Energy Efficiency: 4. Implementation “To be truly radical is to make hope possible, not despair convincing.” — Raymond Williams Amory B. Lovins Chairman and Chief Scientist Rocky Mountain Institute www .rmi.org [email protected] Copyright © 2007 Stanford University. All rights reserved. Distribution licensed to Rocky Mountain Institute. Osage (Iowa) municipal utilities ◊ 11 employees serving ~3,800 population ◊ A decade of demand-side management advice to homes and small businesses: Prepaid all the debt and built a $2.5M emergency fund Cut the rates 5 times in 5 y (by 1/3 real, to 1/2 IA av.) Kept existing factories competitive & attracted two more Kept >$1,000/household-y in town, supporting local jobs and multipliers Made Osage noticeably more prosperous than comparable neighboring towns ◊ If you can’t keep the bathtub full because the water keeps running out…do you need a bigger water-heater, or do you need a plug? U.S. energy/GDP already cut 46%, to very nearly the 1976 “soft path” 250 primary energy consumption (quadrillion BTU/year) 200 "hard path" projected by industry and government ~1975 government USEIA Annual 150 Energy Outlook actual total actual total energy saved 86 q/y = Reference Case, consumption 2004 and 2006 reported by USEIAconsumption 2.12× 2005 oil 100 "soft path" proposed by Lovins, Foreign Affairs , Fall 1976 coal gas oil and gas 50 soft technologies oil
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Sustainable Solutions
    DukeDuDu DuEnergykkeke eEnergy EnergyEnergy RDuenewablesDuke kR e RenewablesR enewablesEnergyenewables Energy Wind Renewables SustainableCommercial Regulated Third-PartyPower and U.S. Solar SolutionsSolar BatteryCustomer Portfolio Power Power Storage ProjectsProjects Projects Projects Including O&M sites Garden Michigan Fairbanks Pinnebog Echo McKinley Sigel Brookfield Pisgah Mountain Pine River Minden Isabella Gratiot Spruce Mountain Rosiere Wind Shirley Sterling Berkley EastFutureGen Campbell Hill Top of the World Ledyard Block Island Laurel HillBald Eagle Shoreham Bellefonte Silver Sage Happy Jack North Allegheny New Jersey Sunset Reservoir Sunset Reservoir San Jose Kit Carson Beckjord I San Carlos VictoryVictory Palmer PumpjackPumpjack North Carolina Taylorsville Dogwood Garysburg Murfreesboro Rio Bravo I & II Cimarron II North Carolina Halifax Long Farm Seaboard River Road Rio Bravo I & II Ironwood Taylorsville Dogwood Garysburg Murfreesboro Tarboro Gaston Woodland Winton Long Farm Seaboard Wildwood I & II Battleboro Halifax RiverSunbury Road Longboat Tarboro Gaston Woodland WintonShawboro Longboat Sunbury North Rosamond Frontier Battleboro Capital Partners Highlander Shawboro Highlander Bagdad Prescott Valley Martins Creek Hertford Frontier II Holiness Capital Partners Windsor Cooper Hill Bagdad MurphyMartins Farm Creek Hertford Seville I & II Black WingateHoliness WindsorCreswell Cooper Hill CA Hospitals Murphy Farm Everetts Wildcat Mountain Wingate Creswell EverettsWashington Wildcat White Post Shelby Washington Millfield Broad
    [Show full text]
  • University of Cincinnati
    UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI 05/29/08 Date:___________________ Carl Sterner I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Master in: Architecture It is entitled: A Sustainable Pattern Language: A Comprehensive Approach to Sustainable Design This work and its defense approved by: Chair: T_om__ _Bible___________________________ Elizabeth______ _Riorden________________________ Michael_____ _Zaretsky_________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ A Sustainable Pattern Language: A Comprehensive Approach to Sustainable Design Carl S. Sterner Bachelor of Architecture University of Cincinnati, 2006 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture University of Cincinnati College of Design, Architecture, Art & Planning School of Architecture & Interior Design Committee Members: G. Thomas Bible Elizabeth Riorden Michael Zaretsky May 2008 Copyright © 2008 by Carl S. Sterner All rights reserved. Please direct reprint requests and questions to: Carl S. Sterner, [email protected] Abstract Sustainable design as presently prac- ticed focuses on technical solutions, ignoring the socio-cultural dimensions of sustainability. A truly sustainable society will require substantial change to our economic structure and social order. Architecture must therefore en- gage both the social and technical di- mensions of sustainability. This thesis attempts to understand the architectural implications
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Renewables Blows Into Oklahoma with 200-Megawatt Wind Project
    Duke Energy Renewables blows into Oklahoma with 200-megawatt wind project - Company will sell power to City Utilities of Springfield - Project pushes Duke Energy Renewables past 2,000 megawatts of wind power in U.S. New Duke Energy logo CHARLOTTE, N.C., Dec. 3, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Duke Energy Renewables today announced it will build a large-scale wind power project in Oklahoma, the company's first renewables project in the state. When built, it will increase Duke Energy Renewables' U.S. wind capacity to more than 2,000 megawatts (MW). Duke Energy Renewables will build, own and operate the Frontier Windpower Project, sited in Kay County, east of Blackwell, Okla. The 200-MW wind farm will produce enough emissions-free electricity to power about 60,000 homes. "We're investing heavily in renewable energy and surpassing 2,000 megawatts of wind power is a significant accomplishment for our company," said Greg Wolf, president of Duke Energy's Commercial Portfolio. "We are excited to be working with the community and local landowners as we get our first project in this wind-rich state underway. The facility will help City Utilities meet its renewable energy goals while creating economic development opportunities for Kay County." The power will be sold to City Utilities of Springfield, Mo., under a 22-year agreement. "City Utilities is pleased to partner with Duke Energy on the Frontier Windpower Project," said Scott Miller, general manager, City Utilities of Springfield. "Providing a long-term renewable source of power generation in this changing market is critical to the future of utilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy 11.Qxd.Qxd
    1755 Massachusetts Ave., NW Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 – USA T: (+1-202) 332-9312 F: (+1-202) 265-9531 E: [email protected] www.aicgs.org 34 AICGS POLICY REPORT OVERCOMING THE LETHARGY: CLIMATE CHANGE, ENERGY SECURITY, AND THE CASE FOR A THIRD INDUSTRIAL Located in Washington, D.C., the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies is an independent, non-profit public policy organization that works REVOLUTION in Germany and the United States to address current and emerging policy challenges. Founded in 1983, the Institute is affiliated with The Johns Hopkins University. The Institute is governed by its own Board of Trustees, which includes prominent German and American leaders from the business, policy, and academic communities. Alexander Ochs Building Knowledge, Insights, and Networks for German-American Relations AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword 3 About the Author 5 The American Institute for Contemporary German Studies strengthens the German-American relation - Chapter 1: Introduction 7 ship in an evolving Europe and changing world. The Institute produces objective and original analyses of Chapter 2: Climate Change and Energy Security: An Analysis of developments and trends in Germany, Europe, and the United States; creates new transatlantic the Challenge 9 networks; and facilitates dialogue among the busi - ness, political, and academic communities to manage Chapter 3: The Third Industrial Revolution: How It Might Look - differences and define and promote common inter - or Is It Already Happening? 17 ests. Chapter 4: Making the Economic Case for Climate Action 23 ©2008 by the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies Chapter 5: A New Era for Transatlantic Cooperation on Energy ISBN 1-933942-12-6 and Climate Change? 35 ADDITIONAL COPIES: Notes 47 Additional Copies of this Policy Report are available for $5.00 to cover postage and handling from the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy at a Glance
    Duke Energy At A Glance Regulated Utilities Commercial Portfolio Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 38% Natural Gas/Fuel Oil 37% Coal 100% Renewable 18% Nuclear 7% Hydro and Solar Commercial Portfolio primarily builds, develops, and operates Generated (net output gigawatt-hours (GWh))2 wind and solar renewable generation and energy transmission 36% Coal projects throughout the continental U.S. The portfolio includes nonregulated renewable energy, electric transmission, natural 34% Nuclear gas infrastructure and energy storage businesses. 29% Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Commercial Portfolio’s renewable energy includes utility-scale 1% Hydro and Solar wind and solar generation assets which total more than 2,500 MW across 12 states from more than 22 wind farms and 38 2 Customer Diversity (in billed GWh sales) commercial solar farms. Revenues are primarily generated by selling the power through long-term contracts to utilities, electric 33% Residential cooperatives, municipalities, and other customers. 31% General Services Duke Energy currently has about 1,950 MW of wind and solar 21% Industrial energy in operation (pie chart excludes 538 MW, which are 15% Wholesale/Other from equity investments) Regulated Utilities consists of Duke Energy’s regulated generation, electric and natural gas transmission and distribution systems. Regulated Utilities generation portfolio is International Energy a balanced mix of energy resources having different operating Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 characteristics and fuel sources designed to provide energy at the lowest possible cost. 70% Hydro Electric Operations 22% Fuel Oil Owns approximately 50,200 megawatts (MW) of 6% Natural Gas generating capacity 2% Coal Service area covers about 95,000 square miles with International Energy principally operates and manages power an estimated population of 24 million generation facilities and engages in sales and marketing of electric power, natural gas, and natural gas liquids outside the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Application for FDF Variance
    139 E. Fourth Street, EM740 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 April 27, 2016 VIA OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Mr. Robert Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator Region 5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 W. Jackson Blvd. Chicago, IL 60604 Ms. Carol S. Comer, Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North, 13th Floor 100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204 RE: Fundamentalty Different Factors Variance Application for Duke Energy Indiana, LLC - EdWardsport IGCC Station (NPDES Permit IN0002780) Dear Mr. Kaplan and Ms. Comer. Enclosed, please find an application by Duke Energy Indiana, LLC for a fundamentally different factors variance from recently adopted revisions to the Steam Electric EHluenl Limitation Guidelines that are applicable to gasification wastewater generated at the Edwardsport IGCC Station. This Application is being submitted pursuant to the authority granted by Section 301 (n) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1311 {n). Please contact me (513-287-2268 or [email protected]) if you have any questions about the enclosed materials. Sincerely, p~~t~ Duke Energy - Environmental Services Enclosure (:li,ek 011t: Apc!26'",,0I~ •...,.,.,....,,bm 0000- HHl*l o , I\lt. Ut INDIAl'IA Cftrck~•m~n •=UICA1l l•~lc:• N• Mrr lnvel« O.reo Vo~•rfD c,1uA•o11n1 DbcCMtnlS T•l:c tt Latt0.11tt PalcJAnH1uu M?-2011 A~r1Wl016 101!6677 lllOO 000 0.00 50.00 fEl:fOR f,O~ VARIAN('£AP1'llC'IITl0H ©@fP'W 'tool TeuJ Ttttl Toto! Clittk N•<ttblN 0•1< Crf.lnAIMWftf 0tft&41•U L.ate- Chara.n P1WAmo•ot IIIOOl~IOC'I o\p,-12&2016 $30.00 so-oo $0.00 s,P.oo ~~DUKE ~ -ENERGY.
    [Show full text]
  • Sep. 01, 2015 Duke Energy Renewables Acquires Half Interest
    Duke Energy media contact: Tammie McGee 980.373.8812 | 800.559.3853 Sumitomo Corporation of Americas media contact: Jewelle Yamada 212-207-0574 Sept. 1, 2015 Life just got a little sweeter for Duke Energy Renewables . Duke Energy Renewables acquires half interest in Sumitomo’s Mesquite Creek Wind Project serving Mars Inc. Duke Energy Renewables now owns more than 1.2 gigawatts of wind capacity in Texas CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Duke Energy Renewables has acquired a 50-percent stake in Mesquite Creek Wind, a 211-megawatt (MW) wind power project near Lamesa, Texas, through its joint venture partnership with Sumitomo Corp. of Americas. The acquisition increases Duke Energy Renewables’ Texas wind capacity to more than 1,200 MW. Global food manufacturer Mars Inc., best known for its candy products, is purchasing the power and associated renewable energy credits from the wind farm for a 20-year period. The facility began operations in April of this year. “Mars is an industry leader in using sustainable business practices to meet its customers’ needs,” said Greg Wolf, president of Duke Energy’s Commercial Portfolio. “We’re proud to partner with Sumitomo to provide emissions-free wind energy to Mars and help them achieve their goal of carbon neutral operations by 2040.” Mesquite Creek Wind consists of 118 1.7 MW GE wind turbines, enough to provide electricity for Mars’ entire U.S. operations comprised of 70 sites, including 37 factories. The energy produced is enough to make 13 billion SNICKERS® bars or 188 billion sticks of ORBIT® gum. “Mesquite Creek Wind has been a landmark project for our company as the sixth renewable energy investment in the U.S.,” said Teruyuki Miyazaki, SVP and GM of Environment and Infrastructure Group, Sumitomo Corporation of Americas.
    [Show full text]
  • Cleaner Energy, Greener Profits
    Cleaner Energy, Greener Profits: Fuel Cells as Cost-Effective Distributed Energy Resources Contents: Executive Summary . 2 By Joel N. Swisher, Ph.D., P.E. Introduction . 4 Rocky Mountain Institute Fuel cells: A small, clean,reliable This publication and its underlying research were funded power source . 6 by the grants from the W. Alton Jones Foundation, What is different Pew Charitable Trusts, and Energy Foundation. about today’s electricity problems? The author, a civil and mechanical engineer with a . 8 Stanford doctorate in civil and environmental engineering, is an authority on distributed generation Changing Trends in and leads RMI’s Energy and Resource Services team. the Electricity Industry . 9 Small is profitable: the economic benefits of distributed generation . 13 Early markets and commercialization paths . 32 Cleaner Energy, Greener Profits Executive Summary The electric power industry is undergoing centrally focused “generation-transmission- major changes that are reshaping the traditional distribution” companies into a more heteroge- roles of utilities, creating opportunities for new neous structure. The new industry will be made technologies, and redefining the scope and up of companies fulfilling various traditional character of government regulation. These roles, including independent power producers, changes are arising out of the interaction of electric service providers, energy brokers and several driving forces: marketers, transmission operators, and local distribution companies. • An emerging technological shift could offer distributed generation sources economic One of the most promising and exciting distrib- benefits unavailable to traditional, central- uted generation (DG) options is fuel cell ized sources of electricity. technology, which converts fuel to electricity at • Regulatory and public policy support is high efficiency, without combustion, and with growing for competition over traditional negligible emissions.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Policy and Economics
    Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Policy and Economics A Report Prepared for the Kansas Energy Council Trisha Shrum, KEC Research Fellow August 3, 2007 1 Acknowledgments This review benefited from the indispensable advice and assistance of many individuals. Dr. John Cita, Chief of Economic Policy of the Kansas Corporation Commission, provided comments, edited, and contributed to multiple drafts, in addition to his generous contribution of time spent advising on various economic issues. Dr. Robert Glass, Managing Research Economist of the KCC, also provided valuable comments and advice. Jim Sanderson, Senior Research Economist of the KCC, contributed data and assistance. Carlos Centeno and Kerem Sengun both put forth extremely helpful comments in the editing process. Charles Komanoff also contributed provided valuable feedback. Throughout the entire development of this review, Liz Brosius, Director of the KEC, was a constant guide and highly effective editor. I truly appreciate the valuable contributions of each of these individuals. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary. .4 Introduction. 8 Scientific Conclusions on Climate Change. 8 Summary of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. .9 Economics and Greenhouse Gas Policy. .9 Economic Principles Relevant to the Discussion. .10 Climate Change Economics . 12 Estimating the Benefit of Reducing Greenhouse Gases . 12 Estimating the Cost of Reducing Greenhouse Gases. .12 Dealing with Uncertainty. .13 Mitigating Climate Change: Atmospheric GHG Stabilization Goals. .14 Overview of Control Methodologies: Market vs. Non-Market Approaches . 17 Controlling the Quantity of GHG Emissions: The Greenhouse Gas Tax. 18 The Economics of the Greenhouse Gas Tax. 18 Administration of a Greenhouse Gas Tax. 20 Political Considerations of a Greenhouse Gas Tax.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Notrees Wind Storage Demonstration Project
    Technology Performance Report: Duke Energy Notrees Wind Storage Demonstration Project 2013 Interim Report Contract ID: DE-OE0000195 Project Type: Regional Demonstration Revision: Final Submittal Company Name: Duke Energy November 2013 This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-OE0000195. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of its employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes a legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. CONTENTS 1 OVERVIEW OF THE ENERGY STORAGE PROJECT ....................................................... 1-1 1.1 Phases and Tasks ........................................................................................................ 1-2 Phase 1: Project Definition, NEPA Compliance and Economic Analysis ........................ 1-2 Phase 2: Project
    [Show full text]