Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2017 · 35 citations · 12 references
Public AffairsEnvironmental PolicyRegulatory PolicyEnvironmental RegulationRegulatory Impact AssessmentSpatial AnalysisElectricity RegulationEmissions Control PolicyEnergy GeographyPower Sector EconomicsElectric Power Sector DecarbonizationEmission RegulationEmissions ControlMarginal Compliance CostsPower GenerationPower Plant EmissionsPower Sector Emissions ManagementSpatial Emission Patterns
Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) generate air, water, and solids emissions that impose substantial human health, environmental, and climate change (HEC) damages. This work demonstrates the importance of accounting for cross-media emissions tradeoffs, plant and regional emissions factors, and spatially variation in the marginal damages of air emissions when performing regulatory impact analyses for electric power generation. As a case study, we assess the benefits and costs of treating wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater at US CFPPs using the two best available treatment technology options specified in the 2015 Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELGs). We perform a life-cycle inventory of electricity and chemical inputs to FGD wastewater treatment processes and quantify the marginal HEC damages of associated air emissions. We combine these spatially resolved damage estimates with Environmental Protection Agency estimates of water quality benefits, fuel-switching benefits, and regulatory compliance costs. We estimate that the ELGs will impose average net costs of $3.01 per cubic meter for chemical precipitation and biological wastewater treatment and $11.26 per cubic meter for zero-liquid discharge wastewater treatment (expected cost-benefit ratios of 1.8 and 1.7, respectively), with damages concentrated in regions containing a high fraction of coal generation or a large chemical manufacturing industry. Findings of net cost for FGD wastewater treatment are robust to uncertainty in auxiliary power source, location of chemical manufacturing, and binding air emissions limits in noncompliant regions, among other variables. Future regulatory design will minimize compliance costs and HEC tradeoffs by regulating air, water, and solids emissions simultaneously and performing regulatory assessments that account for spatial variation in emissions impacts.
12
Regional variations in the health, environmental, and climate benefits of wind and solar generation
Kyle Siler-Evans, Inês L. Azevedo, M. Granger Morgan et al. · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2013 · 189 citations · Full text
Agriculture, Environmental Policy, Environmental Sciences +14