Wind, solar & battery costs have plummeted & energy storage installs are booming. Good timing for my new paper w/@dhariksm & @nsepulvedam on "Long-run system value of battery energy storage in future grids with increasing wind and solar generation"
Our new study out in @ElsevierEnergy's journal Applied Energy finds that the economic value of storage increases as variable renewable energy generation supplies an increasing share of electricity supply but that storage cost declines are needed to realize full potential.
We used a detailed electricity system planning model (energy.mit.edu/wp-content/upl…) to examine battery storage & determine key drivers that impact its economic value, how value changes w/increasing deployment over time, and implications for the long-term cost-effectiveness of storage.
In round #s: assuming electrification consistent w/net zero economy wide emissions by 2050, US needs ~5k-5.5k TWh of total electricity in 2035 (vs ~4k now). Need to ~double again by 2050 too! We have on order or 1.5k TWh from all clean sources today (about 1/2 nuclear & 1/2 RE).
So that says we need to more than triple all current carbon-free generation from now to 2035 to meet Biden goal. And we would need to build ~7 times current carbon-free generation cumulatively by 2050 to keep up with growing electric demand from EVs, heat pumps, electrolysis, etc
I'm a co-PI of @Princeton's Net Zero America study which is researching what it will take to get the US to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. We'll be sharing findings later this year on the scale and pace of this undertaking and the impacts on employment, pollution, etc.
A new ICE order from the Trump Administration out today may result in deportation of thousands of international students attending U.S. universities. Pure spite and racist hatred as policy. 😡 ice.gov/news/releases/…
As many universities (including mine) go partially or entirely online this Fall to continue their educational missions and contend with health risks of #COVID19, this new policy bars students on nonimmigrant F-1 visas from taking courses entirely online while residing in the U.S.
It simultaneously prohibits those in the U.S. from taking more than 1 class online while maintaining their visa status. In effect, this order forces students to take a full course load (less 1 online class) in person, whether that is safe or not, or to leave the country entirely
Im prepping my second to last lecture for 'Introduction to the Electricity Sector' -- on distributed energy resources & associated regulatory challenges. It's made me revisit the huge body of work published out of @MITEnergy Utility of the Future study effort...
I was so fortunate to be part of this effort, to learn from mythical figures in the field including Ignacio Perez-Arriaga (our fearless leader & my mentor), Dick Schmalensee, Bill Hogan, Paul Joskow, Michael Caramanis, Dick Tabors, Tomas Gomez, Carlos Batlle, and many more...
...and to get to spend 5 yrs thinking through regulatory challenges posed by growth of distributed energy resources with a crew of brilliant young scholars incl. @burgersb, Jose Pablo Chaves, Ash Bharatkumar, Pablo Duenas, Ignacio Herrero, Claudio Vergara, Sam Huntington & more.
"Months, not weeks." that's the phrase that went bouncing around in my head all day.
Modeled scenarios I've seen for spread of #COVID19 in US (eg nyti.ms/2wSDnro) dont have us past peak infections until summer, and later if we successfully in to flattening the curve.
The paradox: the better we are at maintaining social distance -- work from home, closed schools, kids kept from play dates, no dinner parties, etc -- the longer until we're past peak infections. The better we do, the less "severe" things will seem, making it harder to maintain.
But the difference between a peak of infections in July vs Sept is the difference between an overloaded medical system or one that can keep pace with the strain, and literally 100s of thousands of lives saved.
@mzjacobson Hi Mark, thanks for the reply. I acknowledged in the thread that 100% renewables is feasible. That was not the claim you made in your tweet.
@mzjacobson Your claim here that "no legitimate study finds nuclear, CCS lower cost" also must apply your personal opinion as to what constitutes "legitimacy." I hope you can admit it stands in contrast to peer review process and summary of IPCC Working Group 3 for example.
@mzjacobson I would be perfectly happy if jurisdictions end up building a 100% renewable energy systems. You/I may even prefer that option to all others. But 100% wind, water, solar is obviously not the ONLY way to decarbonize energy systems. The peer reviewed literature explores many others
Unbelievable. The personal opinion stated w/100% certitude below stands in contrast to dozens of peer reviewed studies in Jacobson's own field. But it's either his way or you're standing in way of True Solutions. A highly problematic way for an academic to engage in public sphere
We should all have a lot more humility and recognize that effective solutions to the highly complex challenge posed by climate change are manifold and remain uncertain. Anyone pretending to know the One True Answer is overstating our epistemic capability.
Id also argue academics engaging in policy debate have responsibility to represent state of knowledge in their field as a whole, not solely their personal views or research. I know we all believe our work is correct. But have humility to note when field presents differing views.
I've been looking for good information on what hydrogen blend level combustion turbines of various sizes/designs can handle today and likely in the near future. I found this good overview article from the excellent @sonalcpatel@POWERmagazine: powermag.com/high-volume-hy…
"Since 1970, MHPS has fired 29 gas turbine units with hydrogen content ranging between 30% & 90%, tests that have spanned over 3.5 million operating hours. A key challenge ... was to reduce high NOx emissions associated with hydrogen combustion without compromising efficiency."
"Because hydrogen has a higher flame speed compared to natural gas, MHPS also sought to reduce the risk of combustion oscillation and “flashback” (backfire) in higher hydrogen mixes."
For the millionth time, say it with me now: Innovation is NOT synonymous with R&D! Deployment drives innovation. Any serious innovation agenda includes subsidy and/or regulation to drive early markets, deployment and maturation of emerging technologies AND lots more $ for R&D.
That's how we made wind, solar, and batteries cheap. That's how we got the shale gas revolution. And that's how we're going to make a full suite of climate solutions affordable and scalable for global diffusion.
If you're really serious about an innovation agenda to confront climate (and I am!), a big R&D spend is both totally necessary and wholly insufficient. /End
Sanders has a big vision for tackling #climatechange & has "set a marker in terms of the pace and scale of spending he's proposing" as I told @nytimes. That's thrilling supporters, but leaving many experts (myself included) less impressed. Read more here: nytimes.com/2019/11/14/cli…
My conversation with @LFFriedman was of course longer than the single quote that made the above article. Here are a few more of the thoughts on Sanders climate plan I shared...
1. Public spending & publicly-owned utilities (power marketing authorities) are big levers at government's disposal. We can put them to use to build a cleaner energy system. But they are a small slice of the wide range of policy levers and tools that should be brought to bear.
In 2008, #Massachusetts stepped into a global #climate leadership position w/passage of the landmark Global Warming Solutions Act. This year, it has the opportunity to renew that leadership and rejoin the climate vanguard by passing H.3983, the "2050 Roadmap Act." A thread... 1/
The #Massachussetts 2050 Roadmap Bill, sponsored by @JoanMeschino (👏) + supported by 59 legislators, provides a timely update to the regulatory framework established by the Global Warming Solutions Act and a critical opportunity to renew the commonwealth’s climate leadership. 3/
With @PSEGNews announcing today a commitment to cut CO2 emissions from electricity operations 80% below 2005 levels by 2046 and a "vision" for net-zero emissions by 2050 (roi-nj.com/2019/07/25/ind…), it is worth taking stock of major US utility commitments to deep CO2 cuts...
List is ranked based on # of customers (total population served is larger)
@daveregrets@MarkVinPaul@gregorytcarlock@noahqk@hal_harvey This is especially true when accounting for automatic adjustments on cost or living indexed benefits. Social security payments, food stamps, etc all go up when costs of energy/goods go up, so if carbon price drives prices, indexed benefits and transfers also go up. Important.
This is bad. Like, lots of bad. Canadian forests have gone from absorbing ~100 million metric tons of CO2/year (MMT/y) to releasing 100-200 MMT/y. A net swing of 200-300 MMT/y is equivalent to ~12-18% of US electricity sector CO2 emissions. Not clear how we'd ever reverse this...
The bill is notable and important contribution to efforts to build national consensus for serious clean energy and climate policy action. Here's why I like it...
1. There's broad consensus electricity is the linchpin in any effort to confront #climatechange, not only because it's responsible for ~30% of US CO2, but also because electrifying more energy use in transportation, buildings, & industry is key to decarbonize those sectors too.
There's a new working paper from econonomists @UChiEnergy circulating today that claims Renewable Portfolio Standards implemented in 29 states raise electricity rates and are a very costly way to cut CO2. I have some serious questions/concerns about the paper. A thread...
She asked me to comment & sent the paper which I was able to read over the weekend. I shared some concerns.
I am -- and encourage others to be -- very hesitant to treat this study as the definitive word on the cost of RPS policies. In particular, I urge any policy makers or stakeholders in policy debates to treat these findings WITH CAUTION at this stage.
First on method: I estimate GHG benefits of U.S. coal to natural gas shift in electricity sector, including 1) direct emissions from coal & natural gas generators, 2) upstream coal mine methane emissions and 3) upstream natural gas methane emissions at different leak rates.
I calculate the net effect on CO2-equivalent emissions using the 100 year global warming potential impact and 20 year global warming potential (GWP). Please note all relevant caveats that apply to using GWP (see
Wondering if injecting CO2 into the ground to get more CO2 (in the form of oil) out of the ground actually reduces net emissions? @cleanaircatf analysis says yes: every barrel of oil produced using CO2 injection for "enhanced oil recovery" reduces CO2 by about 37%.
There's no doubt variation around that precise number, given the different carbon intensities of different sources of oil that may be produced & displaced by CO2 for EOR. Something @DxGordon can probably comment on. But nice to have a ballpark figure from @cleanaircatf.
.@DrKateMarvel: "12 years isnt a deadline, and climate change isnt a cliff we fall off — it's a slope we slide down. We dont have 12 years to prevent climate change — we have no time. It's already here. Even under a BAU scenario, the world isnt going to end in exactly 12 years."
"[@AOC]'s right that decisions we make in the next decade will determine how bad climate change gets — we can't prevent bad things, but we have the power to avoid the worst-case scenario." -@DrKateMarvel
Today, @AOC & @EdMarkey released a Congressional Resolution calling for a #GreenNewDeal, "a 10-year plan to mobilize every aspect of American society at a scale not seen since World War 2 to achieve net-zero greenhouse emissions and create economic prosperity for all." My take...
Both are short, so dig in yourself if you haven't yet.
I commend @AOC, @EdMarkey & #GreenNewDeal co-sponsors for putting the urgent need to confront #climatechange with an ambitious clean energy mobilization on the top of the political agenda. This is an urgent threat. Confronting it is a real opportunity for economic renewal.