Results 1 - 9 of 9
Results 1 - 9 of 9. Search took: 0.015 seconds
|Sort by: date | relevance|
[en] Televisions (TVs) account for a significant portion of residential electricity consumption and global TV shipments are expected to continue to increase. We assess the market trends in the energy efficiency of TVs that are likely to occur without any additional policy intervention and estimate that TV efficiency will likely improve by over 60% by 2015 with savings potential of 45 terawatt-hours [TW h] per year in 2015, compared to today’s technology. We discuss various energy-efficiency improvement options and evaluate the cost effectiveness of three of them. At least one of these options improves efficiency by at least 20% cost effectively beyond ongoing market trends. We provide insights for policies and programs that can be used to accelerate the adoption of efficient technologies to further capture global energy savings potential from TVs which we estimate to be up to 23 TW h per year in 2015. - Highlights: • We analyze the impact of the recent TV market transition on TV energy consumption. • We review TV technology options that could be realized in the near future. • We assess the cost-effectiveness of selected energy-efficiency improvement options. • We estimate global electricity savings potential in selected scenarios. • We discuss possible directions of market transformation programs
[en] Incentives are policy tools that sway purchase, retail stocking, and production decisions toward energy-efficient products. Incentives complement mandatory standards and labeling policies by accelerating market penetration of products that are more energy efficient than required by existing standards and by preparing the market for more stringent future mandatory requirements. Incentives can be directed at different points in the appliance's supply chain; one point may be more effective than another depending on the technology's maturity and market penetration. This paper seeks to inform future policy and program design by categorizing the main elements of incentive programs from around the world. We identify advantages and disadvantages of program designs through a qualitative overview of incentive programs worldwide. We find that financial incentive programs have greater impact when they target highly efficient technologies with a small market share, and that program designs depend on the market barriers addressed, the target equipment, and the local market context. No program design is inherently superior to another. The key to successful program design and implementation is a thorough understanding of the market and identification of the most important local obstacles to the penetration of energy-efficient technologies. - Highlights: • We researched incentive programs design and implementation worldwide. • This paper seeks to inform future policy and program design. • We identify design and identify advantages and disadvantages. • We find that incentive programs have greater impact when they target highly efficient products. • Program designs depend on the market barriers addressed and the local market context
[en] I analyze the determinants of the stated capital cost of IPPs' power projects which significantly influences their price of power. I show that IPPs face a strong incentive to overstate their capital cost and argue that effective competition or regulatory scrutiny will limit the extent of the same. I analyze the stated capital costs of combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) IPP projects in eight developing countries which became operational during 1990-2006 and find that the stated capital cost of projects selected without competitive bidding is 44-56% higher than those selected with competitive bidding, even after controlling for the effect of cost differences among projects. The extent to which the stated capital costs of projects selected without competitive bidding are higher compared those selected with competitive bidding, is a lower bound on the extent to which they are overstated. My results indicate the drawbacks associated with a policy of promoting private sector participation without an adequate focus on improving competition or regulation. (author)
[en] The imperative to decarbonize long-haul, heavy-duty trucking for mitigating both global climate change as well as air pollution is clear. Given recent developments in battery and ultra-fast charging technology, some of the prominent barriers to electrification of trucking are dissolving rapidly. Here we shed light on a significant yet less-understood barrier, which is the general approach to retail electricity pricing. We show that this is a near term pathway to $0.06/kWh charging costs that will make electric trucking substantially cheaper than diesel. This pathway includes (i) reforming demand charges to reflect true, time-varying system costs; (ii) avoiding charging during a few specific periods (<45 h in a year) when prices are high; and (iii) achieving charging infrastructure utilization of 33% or greater. However, without reforming demand charges and low utilization of charging infrastructure, charging costs more than quadruple (to $0.28/kWh). We also illustrate that a substantial share of current trucking miles within select large regions of the United States can be reliably electrified without constraining electricity generation capacity as it exists today. Using historical hourly electricity price and load data for last 10 years and future projections in Texas and California, we show that electricity demand is at least 10% lower than yearly peak demand for at least 15 h on any given day. In sum, with electricity rates that closely reflect actual power system costs of serving off-peak trucking load, we show that electric trucks can provide overwhelming cost savings over diesel trucks. For reference, at diesel prices of $3.16/gal and charging costs of $0.06/kWh (inclusive of amortized charging station infrastructure costs), an electric truck’s fuel cost savings are $251 000 (NPV), providing net savings of $61 000 (18% of lifetime diesel fuel cost) over the truck’s lifetime at battery price of $170/kWh, or up to $148 000 (44% of lifetime diesel fuel cost) at a battery price of $100/kWh (figure 1). (letter)
[en] Concerns about global climate change have substantially increased the likelihood that future policy will seek to minimize carbon dioxide emissions. As such, even today, electric utilities are making resource planning and investment decisions that consider the possible implications of these future carbon regulations. In this article, we examine the manner in which utilities assess the financial risks associated with future carbon regulations within their long-term resource plans. We base our analysis on a review of the most recent resource plans filed by 15 electric utilities in the Western United States. Virtually all of these utilities made some effort to quantitatively evaluate the potential cost of future carbon regulations when analyzing alternate supply- and demand-side resource options for meeting customer load. Even without federal climate regulation in the US, the prospect of that regulation is already having an impact on utility decision-making and resource choices. That said, the methods and assumptions used by utilities to analyze carbon regulatory risk, and the impact of that analysis on their choice of a particular resource strategy, vary considerably, revealing a number of opportunities for analytic improvement. Though our review focuses on a subset of US electric utilities, this work holds implications for all electric utilities and energy policymakers who are seeking to minimize the compliance costs associated with future carbon regulations. (author)
[en] The Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimated that the near-term cost of reducing carbon emissions would decline with global trading. This decline was based on the assumption that costs of reducing carbon emissions are lower in developing countries than elsewhere. In this paper, we test this hypothesis by estimating the cost of reducing emissions through the use of combined cycle units in place of coal power plants in India. Using data from power plants proposed by independent power producers, we estimate the cost of carbon reduction to be $144/t C. Capital, fuel and other costs are all higher for combined cycles units in India than in the US, while they are comparable for the technologically mature coal plants in the two countries. As the combined cycle technology matures, the cost differential may narrow in the future to as low as $6/t C. A key conclusion of this study is that to the extent project-based activities, e.g., under CDM, rely on new technologies to reduce carbon emissions from similar sources, the cost of carbon reduction may be higher in developing countries, since new technology costs in a nascent market are often higher in these countries
[en] The Western Renewable Energy Zone (WREZ) initiative brings together a diverse set of voices to develop data, tools, and a unique forum for coordinating transmission expansion in the Western Interconnection. In this paper we use a new tool developed in the WREZ initiative to evaluate possible renewable resource selection and transmission expansion decisions. We evaluate these decisions under a number of alternative future scenarios centered on meeting 33% of the annual load in the Western Interconnection with new renewable resources located within WREZ-identified resource hubs. Our analysis finds that wind energy is the largest source of renewable energy procured to meet the 33% RE target across nearly all scenarios analyzed (38-65%). Solar energy is almost always the second largest source (14-41%). We find several load zones where wind energy is the least cost resource under a wide range of sensitivity scenarios. Load zones in the Southwest, on the other hand, are found to switch between wind and solar, and therefore to vary transmission expansion decisions, depending on uncertainties and policies that affect the relative economics of each renewable option. Further, we find that even with total transmission expenditures of $17-34 billion these costs still represent just 10-19% of the total delivered cost of renewable energy. - Research highlights: → We describe a new tool to evaluate transmission expansion and renewable resource selection. → We examine a scenario where 33% of the energy in the Western Interconnection comes from renewables. → Wind energy provides the majority of new renewable energy. → For some loads, the decision to procure wind and the required transmission is insensitive to assumptions. → For other loads, assumptions can shift toward more solar, which also changes the needed transmission.
[en] The objective of this paper is to analyze the effect on utility finances and consumer tariffs of implementing utility-funded demand-side energy efficiency (EE) programs in India. We use the state of Delhi as a case study. We estimate that by 2015, the electric utilities in Delhi can potentially save nearly 14% of total sales. We examine the impacts on utility finances and consumer tariffs by developing scenarios that account for variations in the following factors: (a) incentive mechanisms for mitigating the financial risk of utilities, (b) whether utilities fund the EE programs only partially, (c) whether utilities sell the conserved electricity into spot markets and (d) the level of power shortages utilities are facing. We find that average consumer tariff would increase by 2.2% although consumers participating in EE programs benefit from reduction in their electricity consumption. While utility incentive mechanisms can mitigate utilities’ risk of losing long-run returns, they cannot address the risk of consistently negative cash flow. In case of power shortages, the cash flow risk is amplified (reaching up to 57% of utilities annual returns) and is very sensitive to marginal tariffs of consumers facing power shortages. We conclude by proposing solutions to mitigate utility risks. - Highlights: ► We model implementation of energy efficiency (EE) programs in Delhi, India. ► We examine the impact on utility finances and consumer tariffs from 2012 to 2015. ► We find that average consumer tariffs increase but participating consumers benefit. ► Existing regulatory mechanisms cannot address utilities’ risk of negative cash flow. ► Frequent true-ups or ex-ante revenue adjustment is required to address such risk.
[en] Concerns about global climate change have substantially increased the likelihood that future policy will seek to minimize carbon dioxide emissions. As such, even today, electric utilities are making resource planning and investment decisions that consider the possible implications of these future carbon regulations. In this article, we examine the manner in which utilities assess the financial risks associated with future carbon regulations within their long-term resource plans. We base our analysis on a review of the most recent resource plans filed by 15 electric utilities in the Western United States. Virtually all of these utilities made some effort to quantitatively evaluate the potential cost of future carbon regulations when analyzing alternate supply- and demand-side resource options for meeting customer load. Even without federal climate regulation in the US, the prospect of that regulation is already having an impact on utility decision-making and resource choices. That said, the methods and assumptions used by utilities to analyze carbon regulatory risk, and the impact of that analysis on their choice of a particular resource strategy, vary considerably, revealing a number of opportunities for analytic improvement. Though our review focuses on a subset of US electric utilities, this work holds implications for all electric utilities and energy policymakers who are seeking to minimize the compliance costs associated with future carbon regulations