Search

Abstract The economic viability of new energy technologies is held as a central tenet to their future deployment; conventional wisdom posits economically rational decision-makers will readily invest in proven low-risk and affordable technologies. But what happens when this is not true. This paper examines the non-financial barriers facing economically viable Combined Heat and Power (CHP) projects. CHP is a mature and lower carbon technology that efficiently uses waste heat from thermal electricity generation; CHP can also provide flexibility services to help integrate variable renewable resources. CHP is low risk and many industrialized countries, particularly those in colder climates in Northern Europe and Russia, generate as much as 50% of their electricity and heat needs from CHP, but United States deployment remains low and investment hurdle rates high. While lower U.S. energy costs make some projects un-economic, many economically-viable CHP projects are stalled or killed by non-financial barriers. To better understand why financially viable CHP projects are not getting built, developers, owners and operators, regulators, and other stakeholders of this technology were interviewed and three major barriers emerged a) the business model of the electrical utility b) negative subjective impressions and c) challenges in allocating the risks and benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Over the past decade, the United States (US) has demonstrated strong and evolving interest in the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS), an emerging set of technologies with potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. Given the many technical, economic, and environmental uncertainties about the future of CCS, the political salience of this technology is high. In the US, states make key decisions about deploying energy technology projects, but variation in state-level energy context (both technical and socio-political) is substantial. This research assesses variation in the state-level energy context for CCS development by exploring energy policy stakeholders' perceptions of CCS in four geographically and demographically diverse states. Policy stakeholders have different degrees of familiarity with CCS, and the goal of this research is to understand and compare the perceptions of CCS among stakeholders who shape state-level energy policy. Semi-structured interviews with 84 energy policy stakeholders across government, industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations active in four different states (Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana and Texas) were analyzed to compare perceptions of CCS risks and benefits. Negative associations of CCS were mentioned more frequently than positive attributes in each state, and technical, political and economic risks are more dominant than environmental or health and safety risks. Content analysis of the interviews provides insight on emerging sub-national discourse regarding CCS, on state-level variation in familiarity with CCS, and on sub-national variation in the socio-political context for energy technologies. The variation in state and stakeholder energy priorities and perceptions revealed in this study highlights challenges in the development and implementation of national-level energy policy and also specific challenges in the deployment of CCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Grid-scale energy storage are modeled to arbitrage in electricity market. • Storage-induced emissions are estimated in two power grids with high and low wind penetration. • High wind penetration can favorably pair with storage and reduce air pollutant burden. • Carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury emissions are estimated. • Storage-induced emissions are 42-64% lower in the high- than in the low-wind grid. Energy storage provides many benefits that can improve electric grid performance but has been shown to increase overall system emissions. Yet, how energy storage might interreact with renewables in existing grids and how these interactions affect overall emissions remain unclear. Here, we estimate emissions induced by battery energy storage in two regions of the United States with very different levels of wind penetration using high-resolution, both spatially and temporally, locational marginal prices and hourly marginal emission factors. We find that the emission intensity of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury is 4264% lower in the high wind penetration grid (28%) than in the low wind penetration grid (<5%). This is due in part to a significant share of wind dispatched as marginal fuel in baseload hours when battery storage charges from the grid, reducing storage-induced emissions. Our study suggests that more wind generation can favorably pair with storage and reduce the air pollution burdens otherwise caused by storage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]