DOCSLIB.ORG

Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Energy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Energy Moving Towards a Sustainable Electric Utility Sustainable Energy Options There are many ways for Austin Energy (AE) to reach carbon neutrality by 2020. If the US decides to regulate carbon dioxide emissions AE would face a business choice: whether it wishes to reach carbon neutrality by potentially paying hundreds of millions of dollars in carbon fees, taxes, or For Austin Energy March 2009 offsets, or whether it wants to invest in new sources of renewable or nuclear energy that cost more to build than its proposed energy resource plan but less to operate under a carbon regulation regime. AE’s proposed resource plan appears to be a reliable, low cost, and low risk investment plan compared to the other seven scenarios evaluated by the project team. However, it also reduces direct CO2 emissions the least because AE continues to burn coal at a constant rate through 2020. If AE A Policy Research wishes to reduce its carbon footprint significantly by 2020 one option is to reduce its reliance on coal. For More So-called “clean coal,” nuclear, biomass, and geothermal create opportunities for replacing AE’s Project of the Lyndon B. Information current pulverized coal-fired baseload generation capacity with cleaner forms of baseload power. Johnson School of Biomass and geothermal resources face availability constraints that limit their potential to replace all of AE’s current coal baseload power usage. It is not known if AE could build clean coal facilities Public Affairs If you would like to learn with carbon capture and storage at the necessary scale to replace FPP on its own by 2020. Additional more about Austin Energy, Sustainability nuclear or natural gas power generation capacity remain reliable substitutes for coal baseload power the LBJ School of Public generation. Co-sponsored by Austin Affairs, or Solar Austin, Sustainability is a please visit the following Energy and Solar Austin Renewable sources of energy present the most sustainable options for generating electricity, but are relative term regarding web sites: expensive and uncertain given the variable nature of solar and wind. Energy storage could help the degree of impact that reduce carbon dioxide emissions if coupled with onshore wind investments to reduce the risks www.austinsmartenergy.com a particular activity or associated with the variable nature of wind. The cost of implementing new renewable power www.utexas.edu/lbj power generation generating technologies, particularly solar technologies, into AE’s resource portfolio would need to www.solaraustin.org drop considerably between 2009 and 2020 to make a high renewable investment scenario cost technology has upon the Exploring Future Energy Options competitive with AE’s proposed energy resource plan. environment and the This brochure presents a brief overview of availability of resources the findings of a research project on AE Power Generation Mix by Source (FY 2007) for future generations. “Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Therefore, one activity or Energy.” Several reports were prepared Purchased Renewable Power Energy technology that poses during the 2008-09 academic year by a 9.6% (landfill gas, less adverse policy research project team composed of solar, wind) graduate students from multiple departments 5.1% consequences for future Coal of The University of Texas at Austin through 32.2% generations than another the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Nuclear activity or technology is Affairs. The project was commissioned by 25.8% more sustainable for the Drafts of the summary report and full-length report can be accessed online at the following website: the City of Austin (on behalf of Austin Natural Gas purpose of electric Energy) and Solar Austin, a Central Texas 27.3% generation. non-profit renewable energy organization. http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/news/story/732/ Source: Austin Energy This report seeks to identify feasible and cost-effective investment opportunities for Carbon Austin Energy (AE) that can help contribute AE Direct CO2 Emissions by Source (2007) to the creation of a sustainable electric utility. Neutrality Purchased The report set the target of achieving zero net Power carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2020 as 3% Carbon neutral status is an interim goal towards achieving a sustainable electric utility. achieved by reducing Natural Gas carbon dioxide emissions 26% The power generation mix that AE to the greatest extent implements in the future will represent a Coal 71% possible and then major portion of its cost of service and will balancing the remaining be a significant contributor to either carbon dioxide emissions increasing or reducing AE’s carbon footprint. Source: Austin Energy with measurable and The resources used and technologies reliable carbon dioxide implemented will influence how AE and Austin are perceived as a sustainable utility Austin Energy faces the dilemma of meeting storage methods or by and a sustainable city, respectively. AE’s the energy needs of the public while purchasing offsets. future energy portfolio will affect customer accounting for potential carbon regulation, electricity rates and AE’s capacity to public perception of conventional energy contribute assets to the City of Austin resources, and cost and reliability issues budget. associated with new, clean sources of energy. Austin Energy Storage “The Holy Grail” Climate Austin Smart Energy Protection Utility-scale energy storage Clean – Reliable – Efficient technologies may allow Plan (ACCP) In 2008, Austin Energy released its “Smart electric utilities to store Energy Resource Guide” and launched a public low-cost off-peak 2007 electricity generated from engagement process to gather input from wind to yield electricity Source: Austin Energy citizens and stakeholders on the future during peak usage periods. Austin Energy investment decisions the city can make. Energy storage may Portfolio Analysis Simulator perform a highly valuable will: AE has proposed adding 1,000 Photo: Dan Herron Source: Austin Energy operation for electric additional MW of power In order to assess power The following power generation The simulator generates the utilities that would increase Austin Energy Proposed Resource Plan generation capacity to its generation options, the project types are potential inputs in the following charts and graphs to Establish a CO2 current resource mix by 2020. team designed a user-friendly model: demonstrate how the choice of the value of variable cap and reduction Since releasing this plan, AE spreadsheet relying on Microsoft Pulverized Coal; energy source affects system renewable energy sources plan for utility has made considerable efforts Excel to automate calculations Coal-fired integrated reliability, carbon emissions, (particularly wind). The to engage its customers in a and displays. This simulator gasification and combined and costs: spreadsheet can calculate public dialogue regarding the emissions. allows a user to compute cycle with carbon capture Annual generation capacity by benefits of energy storage proposal and the future energy consequences of resource and storage; resource through 2020; by transferring stored options for AE. The following additions and subtractions made Nuclear; Annual electricity production Only make new additions to AE’s resource mix to AE's resource mix between Natural gas fired by resource through 2020; power generated during off- have been proposed: combustion turbines Hourly load profile by resource peak periods to peak investments in 2009 through 2020. Inputs for meeting peak demand in and combined cycle; carbon-neutral 200 MW of combined- include potential power 2020; demand periods. cycle natural gas additions Wind (on-shore and off- generation and associated Annual carbon emissions power generation. at Sand Hill by 2013; technology investments and the shore); profile through 2020; 100 MW of additional Biomass (wood waste); Potential annual carbon costs Demand-Side associated availability factors, or profits; Reduce peak Note: The 8.7% wind and 50% solar are the amount of capacity that can be biomass by 2016; capacity factors, capital costs, Coal co-fired with biomass; Management counted on during peak demand hours. 600 MW of net on-shore fuel costs, and levelized cost of Landfill gas; Potential costs to offset Source: Austin Energy remaining carbon emissions; (DSM) demand by 700 wind; and electricity associated with these Concentrated solar; Annual capital costs; The City of Austin has an 100 MW of solar by 2020. Solar photovoltaic; and “Nega-Watts” MW by 2020 City Council passed the Austin technologies. A user can Annual fuel costs; and educated populace and Geothermal through energy Climate Protection Plan manipulate the investments in Expected increases in the cost engaged City Council (ACPP) in 2007 to reduce The following seven portfolio different technologies, the of electricity. Conservation, load-shifting, efficiency, concerned with the local and Austin’s contributions to mix scenarios were tested to characteristics of these Energy storage options The graph below demonstrates demonstrate the diversity of peak-smoothing, demand conservation, and global environments. Austin global warming by 2020. The technologies, and cost data to including compressed air energy how costs (green line) can investment opportunities for response, direct load owns its electric utility, Austin primary goal of AE is to align with their assumptions. storage are considered. decrease as carbon emissions demand-side Energy (AE), so its citizens
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2016 Multifamily Rating
    2016 Multifamily Rating Guidebook Austin Energy Green Building Multifamily Rating: Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 4 BASIC REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................................... 4 1. Plans and Specifications ................................................................................................................... 4 2. Current Codes and Regulations ....................................................................................................... 4 3. Transportation Alternatives - Bicycle Use ....................................................................................... 5 4. Building Energy Performance ........................................................................................................... 7 5. Mechanical Systems .......................................................................................................................... 9 6. Tenant Education ............................................................................................................................. 14 7. Testing ............................................................................................................................................... 14 8. Indoor Water Use Reduction ........................................................................................................... 17 9. Outdoor Water Use Reduction
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Austin Energy's Value-Of-Solar Tariff on Solar Installation Rates
    THE EFFECT OF AUSTIN ENERGY’S VALUE-OF-SOLAR TARIFF ON SOLAR INSTALLATION RATES THUY PHUNG, ISABELLE RIU, NATE KAUFMAN, LUCY KESSLER, MARIA AMODIO, GYAN DE SILVA MAY 9, 2017 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Austin EnErGy, thE municipal utility in Austin, Texas, introduced the first Value-of-Solar tariff (VOST) in thE UnitEd StatEs for its rEsidEntial customErs in 2012. ThE VOST rEplacEd Austin EnErGy’s nEt mEtErinG policy, which had allowed for solar customers to sell electricity Generated in excess of their consumption back to the utility at the electric retail rate. Under the VOST, customers are charGed for their electricity usaGe and receive a separate credit on each kilowatt-hour (kWh) their solar panels deliver to the Grid. The VOST aimEd to covEr thE infrastructurE costs associatEd with distributEd GEnEration, while fairly compEnsating customErs for thE ElEctricity thEy produced. UsinG thE diffErEncE-in-differences technique to assess the impact of the VOST on residential solar adoption ratEs, wE analyzEd solar installation ratEs bEforE and aftEr thE tariff was implemEntEd. ThE analysis controls for othEr variablEs to account for aggrEgatE timE trEnds, sEasonality, population, average housEhold incomE, political affiliation, solar rEbatEs, installation cost, and retail electricity rate. We usE two control Groups to comparE with Austin’s solar installation data: 1) thE rEst of thE statE of Texas and 2) the cities of San Antonio and Dallas. Our analysis suGGEsts that thE VOST incrEasEd solar installations ratEs in Austin whEn comparEd to thE rest of TExas. HowEvEr, this positivE result was not statistically siGnificant whEn compared to San Antonio and Dallas.
    [Show full text]
  • 48065 4 970629
    II II 1 III II 1 1 II II 1 1 II Control Number: 48065 MINEllillifiEll Item Number: 4 Addendum StartPage: 0 PUC DOCKET NO. 48065 r , • , fluttrFt 21 AM I I : 53 APPLICATION OF CENTERPOINT PUBLIC UTILITY COM1VIISSION FuEILIc ENERGY HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC FILING CLERK TO REVISE ITS WHOLESALE OF TEXAS TRANSMISSION RATES APPROVED IN DOCKET NO. 47610 PURSUANT TO 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h) AFFIDAVIT OF VERNETTA A. SHOWERS Before me, the undersigned notary public, this day personally appeared Vernetta A. Showers to me known, who being duly sworn according to the law deposes and says: My name is Vernetta A. Showers. I am of legal age and a resident of the State of Texas. I am employed by CenterPoint Energy as Regulatory Compliance Analyst. I have first-hand knowledge of the steps taken by CenterPoint Energy to provide notice to affected persons in connection with the application of CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC in Public Utility Commission of Texas (Commission") Docket No. 48065 On the same day that such application was filed in Docket No. 48065 at the Commission, CenterPoint Energy mailed notice through first class mail to every distribution service provider (DSP") listed in the matrix adopted by the Commission in P.U.C. Docket No. 46604, Commission Staffs Application to Set 2017 Wholesale Transmission Service Charges for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. In addition, CenterPoint Energy also mailed notice by first class mail on the same day as the application was filed to the parties in Docket No. 38339, Application of CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC for Authority to Change Rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Energy Plans in Practice: Case Studies of Austin and Denver D
    Local Energy Plans in Practice: Case Studies of Austin and Denver D. Peterson National Renewable Energy Laboratory E. Matthews Austin Climate Protection Program M. Weingarden Greenprint Denver NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-7A20-50498 March 2011 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Local Energy Plans in Practice: Case Studies of Austin and Denver D. Peterson National Renewable Energy Laboratory E. Matthews Austin Climate Protection Program M. Weingarden Greenprint Denver Prepared under Task No. IGST.0002 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report 1617 Cole Boulevard NREL/TP-7A20-50498 Golden, Colorado 80401 March 2011 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE 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 their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy Law Photo: Istock/Andreasweber
    THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCHOOL OF LAW THE OIL, GAS AND ENERGY RESOURCES LAW SECTION OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS 2014 RENEWABLE ENERGY LAW photo: iStock/AndreasWeber January 28–29, 2014 AT&T Conference Center Austin, Texas EVENT SPONSORS Haynes and Boone, LLP Husch Blackwell LLP Stahl, Bernal & Davies, LLP SPONSORS Andrews Kurth LLP CohnReznick LLP K&L Gates LLP RES Americas Vinson & Elkins LLP SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS Energy Bar Association Gulf Coast Power Association The Wind Coalition Earn up to 15.00 Hours of CLE Credit Including 1.50 Hours of Ethics Credit www.utcle.org 512.475.6700 2014 RENEWABLE ENERGY LAW January 28–29, 2014 AT&T Conference Center Austin, TX Earn up to 15.00 Hours of CLE Credit Including 1.50 Hours of Ethics Credit (TX, CA, NY, OK; IL, KS Expected) TX Legal Specialization Credit Approved for Administrative Law, Oil, Gas and Mineral Law, and Real Estate Law CEP for TX Professional Engineers and TREC CE Available TUESDAY MORNING, JAN. 28, 2014 TUESDAY AFTERNOON 3:00 p.m. .50 hr Presiding Officer: Presiding Officer: Interconnection Overview Brent Stahl, Stahl, Bernal & Davies, LLP, Karen E. Jones, SunPower Corporation, Overview of recent procedural and technical Austin, TX Portland, OR requirement changes and how these have become more demanding. Is this nourishing new practical considerations such as fast-track options for smaller 7:30 a.m. Registration Opens projects? Interesting parallels in ERCOT and CAISO. Includes continental breakfast. THANK YOU TO OUR LUNCHEON SPONSOR Hala N. Ballouz, Electric Power Engineers, Inc., Austin, TX 8:25 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Models for Utility-Managed Rooftop Solar Programs
    MODELS FOR UTILITY-MANAGED ROOFTOP SOLAR PROGRAMS September 13, 2019 Dr. Emily A. Beagle Dr. Yael R. Glazer Dr. Joshua D. Rhodes Kelsey J. Richardson Webber Energy Group University of Texas at Austin Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 3 Glossary ................................................................................................................................. 6 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 Roof Rental or Lease Programs ........................................................................................................ 8 On-Bill Rent-to-Own Tariff ............................................................................................................... 8 Sleeved Power Purchase Agreement ................................................................................................ 9 Utility-Participant Shared Distributed Energy Resources .................................................................. 9 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 9 Model and Program Evaluations ........................................................................................... 11 Roof Rental or Lease Program Model ............................................................................................. 11
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Energy
    Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Energy Summary Report A Policy Research Project of The Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs September 2009 i Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs Policy Research Project Report Number 166 Sustainable Energy Options for Austin Energy Volume II Project directed by David Eaton, Ph.D. A report by the Policy Research Project on Electric Utility Systems and Sustainability 2009 The LBJ School of Public Affairs publishes a wide range of public policy issue titles. For order information and book availability call 512-471-4218 or write to: Office of Communications, Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin, Box Y, Austin, TX 78713-8925. Information is also available online at www.utexas.edu/lbj/pubs/. Library of Congress Control No.: 2009928359 ISBN: 978-0-89940-783-8 ©2009 by The University of Texas at Austin All rights reserved. No part of this publication or any corresponding electronic text and/or images may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the U.S.A. Policy Research Project Participants Students Lauren Alexander, B.A. (Psychology and Radio and Film), The University of Texas at Austin Karen Banks, B.A. (Geography and Sociology), The University of Texas at Austin James Carney, B.A. (International Affairs), Marquette University Camielle Compton, B.A. (Sociology and Environmental Policy), College of William and Mary Katherine Cummins, B.A. (History), Austin College Lauren Dooley, B.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Power for Municipal Utilities. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
    FROM COAST TO COAST, WIND POWER IS A BREEZE Clean energy has a bright future. Today a growing number of public utilities are harvesting a new source of homegrown energy. From Massachusetts to California, more than two dozen municipal utilities have wind power in their energy mix. Wind energy is attractive for many reasons: • Wind energy is clean and renewable. • Wind energy is economically competitive. • Wind energy reduces energy price risks. Unlike coal, natural gas, or oil, the “fuel” for a wind turbine will always be free. • Wind energy is popular with the public. A RECORD YEAR — Wind power is booming. Worldwide, a record 3,800 megawatts (MW) were installed in 2001. These sleek, impressive wind turbines have closed the cost gap with conventional power plants. Depending on size and location, wind farms produce electricity for 3–6 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). The nation’s investment to advance wind technology will lead to even more competitive wind generated power. OLD AND NEW — Wind power is one of mankind’s oldest energy sources. The American experience with wind technology began during Colonial times. During the 1930s, half a million windmills pumped water on the Great Plains. Today’s modern wind turbine is a far cry from the old water pumpers. Incorporating the latest engineering, these sleek, impressive machines produce affordable and reliable electricity. WIND RESOURCE POTENTIAL — Our nation is blessed with an abundance of world-class wind resources. Harnessing the strong winds that sweep across America offers an excellent business opportunity for the nation’s public utilities. MUNICIPAL WIND POWER PIONEERS From Oregon to Maine, municipal utilities are beginning Hull Municipal to harness the wind.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Austin
    PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT Dated January 10, 2017 Ratings: Moody’s: “Aa3” Standard & Poor’s: “AA” Fitch: “AA-” (See “OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION – Ratings”) NEW ISSUE Book-Entry-Only Delivery of the Bonds is subject to the receipt of the opinion of Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, Bond Counsel, to the effect that, assuming continuing compliance by the City of Austin, Texas (the “City”) with certain covenants contained in the Fifteenth Supplement described in this document, interest on the Bonds will be excludable from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation under existing law, subject to the matters described under “TAX MATTERS” in this document, including the alternative minimum tax on corporations. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS (Travis, Williamson and Hays Counties) $103,425,000* Electric Utility System Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 Dated: Date of Delivery Due: As shown on the inside cover page The bonds offered in this document are the $103,425,000* City of Austin, Texas Electric Utility System Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 (the “Bonds”). The Bonds are the fifteenth series of “Parity Electric Utility Obligations” issued pursuant to the master ordinance governing the issuance of electric utility system indebtedness (the “Master Ordinance”) and are authorized and being issued in accordance with a supplemental ordinance pertaining to the Bonds (the “Fifteenth Supplement”). The Fifteenth Supplement delegated to a designated “Pricing Officer” the authority to effect the sale of the Bonds, subject to the terms of the Fifteenth Supplement. See “INTRODUCTION” in this document. The Master Ordinance provides the terms for the issuance of Parity Electric Utility Obligations and the related covenants and security provisions.
    [Show full text]
  • ESG Perspectives ™ the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – an Austin Energy Project Gone Awry
    September 2019 ESG Perspectives ™ The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – An Austin Energy Project Gone Awry by Nick Erickson, VP of Portfolio Management The project would also create about 25 jobs in what is typically considered a high poverty region. Under the Most, if not all, sustainable energy infrastructure presumption that future property tax receipts from the projects are conceived with the best of intentions. The plant would pay off debt, Cushing School District issued environment benefits through the production of cleaner $17.75 million in municipal bonds to fund much-needed and more renewable energy. The consumer consumes renovations and updates to what is a high poverty school the cleaner energy at lower costs. The municipality district. (Cushing ISD’s percent of school-age children constructing the project benefits through a more living in poverty is 28%; the national average is 17%.) diversified, sustainable source of energy and an increase in tax receipts. And the community benefits through an increase in jobs, income, and better community programs funded through the increase in tax revenue. While the list of intended beneficiaries is long, even the best laid plans can go awry and have far reaching unintended and unexpected adverse impacts. The Good In 2008, with natural gas prices at all-time highs, the Austin City Council approved an agreement with Southern Company that would lead to the construction of a biomass power plant and a 20-year, $2.3 billion Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) to buy annually 100 megawatts of the energy generated from the 115-megawatt plant. The biomass plant, which uses wood chips to generate the electricity, was constructed Sources: U.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Appameetingroster Nodupeatt
    Registration List - Attendees Business and Financial Conference 2018 Anaheim, California September 16 - September 19, 2018 Attendee Name Title Organization Name City State George Keefe AEGIS Insurance Services, Inc. East Rutherford NJ Scot Macomber Vice President Loss Control Utility AEGIS Insurance Services, Inc. East Rutherford NJ Operations John Bilsten General Manager Algona Municipal Utilities Algona IA Branndon Kelley Chief Information Officer American Municipal Power, Inc. Columbus OH David Blaylock Senior Manager, Integrated Media American Public Power Association Arlington VA Joy Campbell Senior Meeting Planner American Public Power Association Arlington VA Angela Cuyler Manager of Accounting American Public Power Association Arlington VA John Godfrey Senior Government Relations American Public Power Association Arlington VA Director Jeff Haas Vice President, Membership & American Public Power Association Arlington VA Strategic Development Haley Herbst Manager, Membership & American Public Power Association Arlington VA Corporate Programs Kefiana Kabati Education and Meetings Assistant American Public Power Association Arlington VA Nathan Mitchell Sr. Dir, Electric Reliability American Public Power Association Arlington VA Standards & Security Harry Olibris Chief Financial Officer American Public Power Association Arlington VA Amy Rigney-Gay Vice President of Human American Public Power Association Arlington VA Resources & Administration Meghan Riley Education Specialist American Public Power Association Arlington VA Ursula Schryver
    [Show full text]
  • The Timeline and Events of the February 2021 Texas Electric Grid
    The Timeline and Events of the February 2021 Texas Electric Grid Blackouts July 2021 [Type here] The Timeline and Events of the February 2021 Texas Electric Grid Blackouts A report by a committee of faculty and staff at The University of Texas at Austin July 2021 COMMITTEE CHAIRS Carey W. King, Research Scientist, Assistant Director, Energy Institute Josh D. Rhodes, Research Associate, Department of Mechanical Engineering Jay Zarnikau, Research Fellow, Department of Economics COMMITTEE MEMBERS Contributing Authors Ning Lin, Chief Economist, Bureau of Economic Geology Additional Members Erhan Kutanoglu, Associate Professor, Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering Benjamin Leibowicz, Assistant Professor, Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering Dev Niyogi, Professor, Department of Geological Sciences; Professor, Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering Varun Rai, Professor, LBJ School of Public Affairs; Director, Energy Institute Surya Santoso, Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering David Spence, Baker Botts Chair in Law, School of Law; Professor, Department of Business, Government, and Society Stathis Tompaidis, Professor, Department of Information, Risk and Operations Management, and by courtesy, Department of Finance Hao Zhu, Assistant Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering OTHER CONTRIBUTORS Erik Funkhouser, Director for Research Coordination and Partnerships, Energy Institute
    [Show full text]