Advertisement

Modeling the Impacts of Deep Decarbonization in California and the Western US: Focus on the Transportation and Electricity Sectors

  • Saleh Zakerinia
  • Christopher Yang
  • Sonia Yeh
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Energy book series (LNEN, volume 64)

Abstract

Decarbonization scenarios for California and other Western states of United States to 2030 and 2050 show a number of relatively robust trends, including significant adoption of plug-in electric vehicles and investments in large quantities of renewable wind and solar generation. These two developments in disparate sectors (electricity and transportation) are linked via the use of electricity in the transportation sector. By expanding the existing California TIMES (CA-TIMES) model and including the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) electricity region into this model, we explore the impact of California’s policies on the Western Electricity Coordinating Council grid. Our analysis shows that a climate target on California only and not on the other states could contribute to the greening of power plants in the Western States, driven by the possibility to export electricity to California. When a carbon target is extended to all regions, the grid of all Western States, as well as the entire energy system of California, there cannot be zero emissions without adopting carbon capture and storage.

References

  1. Axsen J, Kurani KS, McCarthy R, Yang C (2011) Plug-in hybrid vehicle GHG impacts in California: integrating consumer-informed recharge profiles with an electricity-dispatch model. Energy Policy 39:1617–1629.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2010.12.038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. EIA (2010) United states energy information administration. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. FERC (2012) Annual transmission planning and evaluation report, 2012. Washington, DC, 2009. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Fripp M (2012) Switch: a planning tool for power systems with large shares of intermittent renewable energy. Environ Sci Technol 46:6371–6378.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es204645cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Greenblatt JB (2015) Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Policy 78:158–172.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hadley SW, Tsvetkova AA (2009) Potential impacts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on regional power generation. Electr J 22:56–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TEJ.2009.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jansen KH, Brown TM, Samuelsen GS (2010) Emissions impacts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle deployment on the U.S. western grid. J Power Sources 195:5409–5416.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.03.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lenox C, Dodder R, Gage C et al (2013) EPA US Nine-region MARKAL Database: database documentation. US EnvironmentalGoogle Scholar
  9. Loulou R, Remme U, Kanudia A et al (2005) Documentation for the TIMES Model Part I. Energy Technology Systems Analysis ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  10. Mileva A, Nelson JH, Johnston J, Kammen DM (2013) SunShot solar power reduces costs and uncertainty in future low-carbon electricity systems. Environ Sci Technol 47:9053–9060.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es401898fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nelson J, Johnston J, Mileva A et al (2012) High-resolution modeling of the western North American power system demonstrates low-cost and low-carbon futures. Energ Policy 43:436–447.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wei M, Nelson J (2013) Deep carbon reductions in California require electrification and integration across economic sectors. Environ Res Lett 8(1):014038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Wei M, Nelson JH, Ting M et al (2012) California’s carbon challenge: scenarios for achieving 80% emissions reductions in 2050. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and Itron to the California Energy CommissionGoogle Scholar
  14. Williams JH, DeBenedictis A, Ghanadan R et al (2012) The technology path to deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts by 2050: the pivotal role of electricity. Sci 335:53–59.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1208365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Yang C, Yeh S, Zakerinia S et al (2015) Achieving California’s 80% greenhouse gas reduction target in 2050: Technology, policy and scenario analysis using CA-TIMES energy economic systems model. Energy Policy 77:118–130.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of TransportationUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Space, Earth and EnvironmentChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations