A geographically resolved method to estimate levelized power plant costs with environmental externalities
Creators
- 1. Energy Institute – The University of Texas at Austin, 2304 Whitis Ave Stop C2400, Austin, TX 78712-1718 (United States)
- 2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 204 E. Dean Keeton Street, Stop C2200, Austin, TX 78712-1591 (United States)
- 3. Bureau of Economic Geology, Center for Energy Economics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX (United States)
- 4. McCombs School of Business, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX (United States)
- 5. Center for Electromechanics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX (United States)
- 6. Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX (United States)
Description
In this analysis we developed and applied a geographically-resolved method to calculate the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) of new power plants on a county-by-county basis while including estimates of some environmental externalities. We calculated the LCOE for each county of the contiguous United States for 12 power plant technologies. The minimum LCOE option for each county varies based on local conditions, capital and fuel costs, environmental externalities, and resource availability. We considered ten scenarios that vary input assumptions. We present the results in a map format to facilitate comparisons by fuel, technology, and location. For our reference analysis, which includes a cost of $62/tCO2 for CO2 emissions natural gas combined cycle, wind, and nuclear are most often the lowest-LCOE option. While the average cost increases when internalizing the environmental externalities (carbon and air pollutants) is small for some technologies, the local cost differences are as high as $0.62/kWh for coal (under our reference analysis). These results display format, and online tools could serve as an educational tool for stakeholders when considering which technologies might or might not be a good fit for a given locality subject to system integration considerations. - Highlights: • We propose a method to add externalities to LCOE. • We present the least cost technology for every county in the US. • The cheapest technology depends on many characteristics of that locale. • We present online tools for users to change our assumptions. • Our tools are useful in discussing the impact of policy on the cost of electricity.
Availability note (English)
Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.025Additional details
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.025;
- PII
- S0301-4215(16)30687-5;
Publishing Information
- Journal Title
- Energy Policy
- Journal Volume
- 102
- Journal Page Range
- p. 491-499
- ISSN
- 0301-4215
- CODEN
- ENPYAC
INIS
- Country of Publication
- United Kingdom
- Country of Input or Organization
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
- INIS RN
- 48085388
- Subject category
- S29: ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY;
- Descriptors DEI
- AIR POLLUTION; CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE; COAL; COMBINED CYCLES; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; EXTERNAL COST; METHANE; NATURAL GAS; POWER PLANTS; RESOURCES; USA
- Descriptors DEC
- ALKANES; CARBON COMPOUNDS; CARBON OXIDES; CARBONACEOUS MATERIALS; CHALCOGENIDES; COST; DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; ELEMENTS; ENERGY SOURCES; EVALUATION; FLUIDS; FOSSIL FUELS; FUEL GAS; FUELS; GAS FUELS; GASES; GOVERNMENT POLICIES; HYDROCARBONS; MATERIALS; NONMETALS; NORTH AMERICA; ORGANIC COMPOUNDS; OXIDES; OXYGEN COMPOUNDS; POLLUTION; THERMODYNAMIC CYCLES
Optional Information
- Copyright
- Copyright (c) 2016 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.