Advertisement

Mitigation and Resilience Tradeoffs for Electricity Outages

  • Jonathan EyerEmail author
  • Adam Rose
Original Paper
  • 137 Downloads

Abstract

Large-scale electricity outages have the potential to result in substantial business interruption losses. These losses can be reduced through a number of tactics within the broader strategies of mitigation and resilience. This paper presents a methodology for analyzing the tradeoffs between mitigation and three categories of resilience. We derive optimality conditions for various combinations of strategies for a Cobb-Douglas damage function and then explore implications of a less restrictive Constant Elasticity of Substitution damage function. We also calibrate the model and perform Monte Carlo simulations to test the sensitivity of the results with respect to changes in major parameters. Simulation results highlight the possibility that substitution away from mitigation towards resilience may lower total expected costs from large-scale outages for a given level of risk reduction expenditure when the marginal benefit of resilience is high relative to the expected marginal benefit of mitigation.

Keywords

Electricity outages Economic losses Reliability Mitigation Resilience Risk reduction trade-offs 

Notes

Funding

The work described in this study was funded by the Transmission Planning and Technical Assistance Division of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability under Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. This paper benefited from helpful comments from Ben Hobbs and participants at the LBNLWorkshop on The Economics of Long Duration, Widespread Power Interruptions, Washington, DC, March 4, 2018.

References

  1. Beenstock M, Goldin E, Haitobsky Y (1997) The cost of power outages in the business and public sectors in Israel: revealed preference vs. subject evaluation. Energy J 18:39–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruneau M, Chang S, Eguchi R, Lee G, O’Rourke T, Reinhorn A, Shinozuka M, Tierney K, Wallace W, Von Winterfeldt D (2003) A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance seismic resilience of communities. Earthquake Spectra 19:733–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chang L, Wu Z (2011) Performance and reliability of electrical power grids under cascading failures. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 33(8):1410–1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dormady N, Roa-Henriquez A, Rose A (2018a) The Resilience of the Firm: A Production Theory Approach. Int J Prod Econ forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  5. Dormady N, Rose A, Roa-Henriquez A, Rosoff H (2018b) A Survey Approach to Measuring the Cost-Effectiveness of Economic Resilience to Disasters.” in M. Ruth and S. G. Reisemann (Eds.), Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems . Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  6. Eto J, Koomey J, Lehman B, Martin N, Mills E, Webber C, Worrell E (2001) Scoping Study on Trends in the Economic Value of Electricity Reliability to the US Economy. Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  7. Eto JH, LaCommare KH, Larsen P, Todd A, Fisher E (2012) An Examination of Temporal Trends in Electricity Reliability Based on Reports from US Electric Utilities. LBNL-5268E, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  8. Greenberg M, Mantell N, Lahr M, Felder F, Zimmerman R (2007) Short and intermediate economic impacts of a terrorist-initiated loss of electric power: case study of New Jersey. Energy Policy 35:722–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Keogh M, Cody C (2013) Resilience in Regulated Utilities. National Association of Regulatory Utility CommissionersGoogle Scholar
  10. Matsukawa I, Fuji Y (1994) Customer preferences for reliable power supply: using data on actual choices of Back-up equipment. Rev Econ Stat 76(3):434–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. National Research Council (2017) Enhancing the resilience of the Nation's electricity system. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Rose A (2004) Defining and measuring economic resilience to disasters. Disaster Prev Manag 13(4):307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rose A (2017) Benefit-cost analysis of economic resilience actions. In: Cutter S (ed) Oxford research encyclopedia of natural Hazard science. Oxford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Rose A, Liao S (2005) Modeling regional economic resilience to disasters: a computable general equilibrium analysis of water service disruptions. J Reg Sci 45(1):75–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rose A, Lim D (2002) Business interruption losses from natural hazards: conceptual and methodology issues in the case of the Northridge earthquake. Environ Hazards: Human Soc Dimen 4:1–14Google Scholar
  16. Rose A, Oladosu G, Salvino D (2005). “Economic Impacts of Electricity Outages in Los Angeles: The Importance of Resilience and General Equilibrium Effects.” In M. A. Crew and M.Spiegel (eds.), Obtaining the Best from Regulation and Competition, Springer ScienceGoogle Scholar
  17. Rose A, Oladosu G, Liao S (2007a) Business interruption impacts of a terrorist attack on the electric power system of Los Angeles: customer resilience to a Total blackout. Risk Anal 27(3):513–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rose A, Porter K, Dash N, Bouabid J, Huyck C, Whitehead J, Tobin LT et al (2007b) Benefit-cost analysis of FEMA Hazard mitigation Grants. Nat Hazards Rev 8(4):97–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sanstad A (2013) Regional Economic Modeling of Electricity Supply Disruptions: A Review. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2015. (USEOP). United States Executive Office of the President. Presidential Policy Directive – Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience. White House Press ReleaseGoogle Scholar
  20. Sue Wing I, Rose A (2018) Economic analysis of electric power infrastructure disruptions: ananalytical generalequilibrium approach. Presented at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Workshop on Economics of Long Duration Power Outages, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  21. Xie W, Rose A et al (2018) Dynamic economic resilience and economic recovery from disasters: a quantitative assessment. Risk Anal 38(6):1306–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Price School of Public Policy and Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events (CREATE)University of Southern California (USC)Los AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations