Download Ezra Hausman

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Addressing Climate Change
while Protecting Consumers
(…and a New Idea)
NASUCA Annual Meeting
November 16 2010
Ezra D. Hausman, Ph.D.
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2010 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
From America’s Finest News Source…
Report: Global Warming Issue From 2 Or
3 Years Ago May Still Be Problem
The Onion, November 10 2010
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
2
Basic Assertions
•
Human-caused, global climate change is a serious
environmental, economic, social, and national security issue
•
Climate change will have significant and harmful impacts on our
lives and on our children’s lives
•
The severity of this threat will become increasingly obvious and
difficult to dismiss over the next decade
•
The U.S. Government will ultimately take action to progressively
and severely restrict the emissions of greenhouse gases into
the atmosphere
•
Consumer advocates and commissions have a role to play
TODAY to protect consumers’ interest as this debate moves
forward
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
3
Basic Assertions
“If the climate-deniers are right—but we combat
climate change anyway—we’ll have slightly higher
energy prices but cleaner air, more renewable
energy, a stronger dollar, more innovative
industries and enemies with less money. If the
climate deniers are wrong, and we do nothing…”
-Thomas Friedman, NY Times,
November 14 2010
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
4
…There Have Been some Setbacks
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
5
Cap and Trade Works for Acid Rain…
DAILY PRICING
TERM
BID PRICE
OFFER
PRICE
SO2
2009
$8.000
$10.000
SO2
2010
$5.000
$9.000
Annual NOx
2010
$300.000
$320.000
Seasonal
NOx
2010
$45.000
$50.000
SPEC
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
6
Taxes Worked for Cigarettes…
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
7
…But CO2 is Different
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
8
Regulatory/Market Innovations
•
Renewable Portfolio Standards
•
Production and Investment Tax Credits
•
Feed-in Tariffs
•
Renewable Power Authority
•
Requirements or prudence determinations for long-term
contracts
Each of these provides benefits, but none
has the broad, market-based impact of
cap-and-trade or a carbon tax
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
9
A New Idea…
CO2RCs (“Corks” – Named by Steve Michel of WRA)
…or ZEEKs (ala Jeremy Fisher)
•
Tradable, technology-independent low-carbon generation
attributes
•
Based on a CO2 emissions threshold of 1 ton per MWh
(“efficient coal generation”)
•
ZEEKs are earned (or burned) for deviating from the
threshold with each MWh of energy generated
•
A zero-CO2 MWh produces 1 ZEEK, while a gas CC might
produce 0.5 ZEEK per MWh; inefficient coal would have to
buy ZEEKs down to the threshold
•
ZEEKs would be fully fungible and separable from energy
deliveries
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
10
ZEEKs vs. Renewable Portfolio Standards
•
Pretty similar, actually.
•
LSEs must “hold certificates” based on a regulated percentage
of electricity sales – compliance obligation is on load
•
We expect (hope?) that ZEEKs would be more standardized,
less beholden to parochial interests, independent of
deliverability requirements, and more fully fungible
•
Not Technology-Specific: and certifiable low-carbon source can
qualify, including demand resources—market picks technology
winners and losers
(May be some vintaging restrictions, as with RPS)
•
More directly targeted to produce GHG-displacement impacts
(this is a secondary benefit of RPS)
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
11
ZEEKs vs. Cap and Trade: Similarities
•
Effectively places a price on greenhouse gas emissions, i.e.,
internalizes the externality
•
Provides a strong incentive for producers of low-carbon
electricity
•
Market-based, fully tradable, allows “the market” to find the least
cost sources of low-carbon energy
•
Sets a specific quantitative target for CO2 emissions from the
power sector and allows the market to find the lowest price/cost
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
12
ZEEKs vs. Cap and Trade: Differences
ZEEKs do not increase the price of electric energy—although
their cost does get passed on to ratepayers
Emissions allowances (Cap-and-Trade) or taxes increase the
energy clearing price in electricity markets because they
increase the variable cost of production.
ZEEKs actually decrease the variable cost of production for
lower-carbon generators (i.e., gas) because they create a
secondary source of revenue for these generators.
Price-takers (i.e., nuclear, hydro, renewables, often coal)
receive a lower price for their energy, making higher-emissions
generation less economically viable
ZEEK-eligible resources make up the revenues in ZEEK sales
(or, for IOUs, obviated purchases)
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
13
ZEEKs vs. Cap and Trade: Differences 2
•
Uncle Sam does not produce ZEEKs – generators do
•
Uncle Sam does not sell or allocate ZEEKs – no fighting over
money or allowances, nor are there opportunities to pilfer
•
Identical (?) impacts (on consumers) in regulated and
deregulated electricity markets
•
ZEEKs are electricity-specific, although there is no reason that
they could not be a part of an economy-wide cap-and-trade
system or carbon tax.
•
ZEEKs target consumer funds towards GHG mitigation, not to
windfalls and payoffs
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
14
ZEEKs: Some Numbers
Total US Electric Sector Energy: 3.8 Billion MWh/year
Total US Electric Sector CO2 Emissions: 2.3 Billion Tons
Pre-Policy ZEEKs: 3.8 - 2.3 = 1.5 Billion (assumes all
generation qualifies)
Total ZEEKs required for 20% reduction in electric sector
emissions: 3.8 – (0.8 * 2.3) = 1.96 Billion
A 31% Increase in ZEEKs
0.46 Billion MWh of carbon-free electricity, or
0.92 Billion MWh at half-ZEEK levels
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
15
ZEEK Numbers: Some Perspective
Total natural gas generation in the US: 0.85 Billion MWh
– doubling this (and displacing coal) would almost meet
20% reduction target
A new 1000 MW nuclear plant would add 8.3 Million
ZEEKs per year –55 new such plants (replacing coal)
would meet 20% reduction target
So would 55,000 3MW wind turbines replacing coal,
operating at 33% capacity factor
So would reducing load by 1%/year for 20 years (if
displacing coal)
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
16
Wrap-up
ZEEKs (or CO2RCs) represent a way to price carbon
and directly support EE, renewables, and any other
source of energy that is truly low-carbon.
Would replace hodgepodge of state, regional, and
federal incentives with a single, market-based approach
while avoiding many pitfalls
Steady ramp-up of requirement would provide a stable
price signal for low-carbon resources in a large, liquid
market
Not the only idea out there for regulating carbon, but
perhaps the best?
www.synapse-energy.com | ©2008 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
17