The Health and Environmental Benefits of Wind and Solar Energy in ...

The Health and Environmental Benefits of Wind and Solar Energy in the United States, 2007-2015 Dev Millstein, Ryan Wiser, Mark Bolinger, Galen Barbose Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory January 2017: Final This work was funded by the Wind Energy Technologies Office, Solar Energy Technologies Office, and Strategic Programs Office, all within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy, under Contract No. Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. 1

Introduction: Health and Environmental Benefits Estimation

2

Project Overview u Context: Wind and solar provide public health and environmental

benefits to the United States. However, not only do these benefits vary dramatically by region, they also vary over time. In the last decade, cumulative wind and solar power deployment has increased rapidly; at the same time, regulatory changes and fossil fuel price changes have led to steep cuts in overall power-sector emissions of pollutants such as SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 as well as to reductions to CO2 emission rates in certain regions. u Goal: Evaluate how wind and solar health and environmental

benefits have evolved from 2007 – 2015 both in absolute terms as well as on a dollar-benefit per kWh basis. Analyze how benefits differ regionally across the continental United States. Assess certain uncertainties in the magnitude of the benefits. 3

Project Approach u Develop hourly generation estimates of (1) utility

wind power; and (2) utility and distributed solar q

Based on data collected by the EIA, within the DOE’s Wind Technology Market report and LBNL’s Utility-Scale Solar report, by GTM, and other sources

u Use EPA’s AVERT and other sources to estimate

avoided emissions of CO2, SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 u Use wide range of social cost of carbon estimates to monetize the CO2 emission reductions u Use a suite of air quality, exposure and health impact models to assess the air quality benefits q

Both in terms of reduced incidence rates and monetary value 4

Literature Review u A number of previous studies have touched on the broad

themes of air quality and climate change impacts from the power sector and the related benefits of renewable power q

q

Selected external references: Siler-Evans et al. (2013); NRC (2010); Driscoll et al. (2015) DOE funded studies: Wind Vision, Hydropower Vision, On the Path to SunShot, RPS Benefits and Impacts

u However, past literature has often focused on a single time

period or a limited set of regions, or instead focused on potential future benefits u No study has fully quantified the benefits that wind and

solar power have already provided over the past decade 5

Literature Review

GHG EMISSIONS

SULFUR DIOXIDE

NITROGEN OXIDES

PARTICULATE MATTER 2.5

WATER USE

Reduced by:

Reduced by:

Reduced by:

Reduced by:

Withdrawal reduced by:

17 million metric tons

Equivalent to

10,000

metric tons

10,300

metric tons

Equivalent to

(central estimates):

(central estimates):

$700 million

$890 million

2.1¢/kWh-solar range: $210$2,000 million

2.7¢/kWh-solar

1,200

metric tons

294 billion gallons

Consumption reduced by:

Perhaps most related to the present work is our analysis of the benefits of solar energy in 2014 (left) that was developed for the On the Path to SunShot report: “The Environmental and Public Health Benefits of Achieving High Penetrations of Solar Energy in the United States.”

7.6 billion gallons

range: $420-$1,590 million

The current analysis expands upon this DOE-funded SunShot work and the previous Wind Vision and RPS analyses, employing more sophisticated methods to estimate wind and solar generation and environmental and health impacts, covering 2007-2015. 6

Our Three-Step Approach 1. Determine the historical generation from utility wind, utility solar, and distributed solar

2. Determine the avoided combustion-based electricity generation due to wind and solar generation and the associated avoided carbon dioxide and air pollution emissions

3. Estimate avoided climate impacts (monetized value) and avoided health impacts (incidences and monetized value) 7

Caveats on Analysis Scope u Focus is on health and environmental impacts associated with

CO2, SO2, NOx and PM2.5; same set of benefits that academics, NRC, and EPA have often chosen to monetize q

q

Not all environmental and health impacts are considered, e.g. water-use reductions and reductions of heavy metals such as mercury; wildlife and land use issues; etc. Only combustion-related impacts considered; other life-cycle stages not included

u Costs are not considered, nor are other benefit and impact

categories; solar and wind may not be the least-expensive means of achieving environmental and health benefits u Cap-and-trade programs (for NOx, SOx, CO2) are assumed to be

non-binding, such that solar and wind reduce total emissions; this is accurate for most regions for much of this historical period q

However, additional analysis of CAIR and other cap-and-trade programs may be needed to fully understand implications 8

1. Determine the Historical Generation from Utility Wind, Utility Solar, and Distributed Solar Methods

9

Utility Wind Generation u Monthly utility wind generation (MWh per month) is

recorded by the U.S. EIA for each wind power plant u For the purpose of calculating avoided fossil

generation, wind power generation needed to be ‘counted’ in the region into which it was delivered q

Every wind plant was screened and all regional power transfers were taken into account • Data sources: EIA Forms 860, 923; AWEA wind project data base; AWEA transfer data; FERC EQR data; DOE’s Wind Technology Market Report data base

u AVERT default profiles then used to estimate hourly

generation 10

Utility Solar Generation u Monthly utility solar generation (MWh per month) is

recorded by the U.S. EIA for each solar power plant EIA ‘utility’ solar includes all plants, even net-metered plants, larger than 1 MW in capacity q Includes both CSP and PV projects q

u Cross region transfers were accounted for in a similar

manner to the wind projects q

Data: EIA Forms 860, 923; FERC EQR data; LBNL Utility Scale Solar Report data base

u AVERT default profiles then used to estimate hourly

generation 11

Distributed Solar Generation u EIA data on distributed solar generation are available

only starting in 2014; as such, generation had to be estimated based on records of installed capacity u GTM provided utility and distributed solar capacity by

state and for each quarter for the years 2010-2015 q

Data from Larry Sherwood and other data sources were used prior to 2010

u Total distributed capacity calculated as the sum of total

GTM/Sherwood solar capacity minus EIA utility capacity q

Necessary because EIA utility category includes the GTM utility category and a portion of GTM’s non-residential category 12

Distributed Solar Generation u Monthly capacity was derived from quarterly capacity

based on linear interpolation and a simple smoothing process to account for small differences in utility plant additions between EIA and GTM u Monthly generation (MWh) estimates were then based

on total monthly capacity q

Regional monthly capacity factors were applied based on profiles within EPA’s AVERT tool, derived from PV-Watts

u Monthly generation estimates compared to 2014-2015

EIA distributed solar estimates (also from PV-Watts) u AVERT default profiles to estimate hourly generation 13

1. Determine the Historical Generation from Utility Wind, Utility Solar, and Distributed Solar Results

14

.0 7" Ju l.0 7 Ja " n. 08 " Ju l.0 8 Ja " n. 09 " Ju l.0 9 Ja " n. 10 " Ju l.1 0 Ja " n. 11 " Ju l.1 1 Ja " n. 12 " Ju l.1 2 Ja " n. 13 " Ju l.1 3 Ja " n. 14 " Ju l.1 4 Ja " n. 15 " Ju l.1 5"

Ja n

Wind%and%solar%capacity%in%the%con1nental%U.S.%% (thousand%MW)%

Wind & Solar Capacity by Month 80"

70"

60" Wind"U6lity"Capacity" U6lity"PV"Capacity"

Distributed"PV"Capacity"

50"

40"

30"

20"

10"

0"

15

)0 7" Ju l)0 7 Ja " n) 08 " Ju l)0 8 Ja " n) 09 " Ju l)0 9 Ja " n) 10 " Ju l)1 0 Ja " n) 11 " Ju l)1 1 Ja " n) 12 " Ju l)1 2 Ja " n) 13 " Ju l)1 3 Ja " n) 14 " Ju l)1 4 Ja " n) 15 " Ju l)1 5"

Ja n

Wind%and%solar%genera-on%in%the%con-nental%U.S.%% (thousand%MWh)%

Wind & Solar Generation by Month 25000" U2lity"Wind"Genera2on"

20000"

15000" U2lity"PV"Genera2on"

Distributed"PV"Genera2on"

EIA"Distributed"PV"Genera2on"

10000"

5000"

0"

16

2. Determine the Avoided Combustion-Based Electricity Generation Due to Wind and Solar Generation and the Associated Avoided Carbon Dioxide and Air Pollution Emissions Methods 17

Determine Avoided Carbon Dioxide and Air Pollution Due to Wind and Solar Generation EPA’s AVERT Model

AVERT Regions

Study utilizes EPA AVERT model to estimate impact of wind and solar on the operation of the existing generation fleet in 2007 – 2015

Input:

Output:

Hourly renewable MWh generated in or delivered to each AVERT region

Plant-level changes in MWh, fuel, and emissions (NOx, SO2, CO2) by unit 18

Determine Avoided Carbon Dioxide and Air Pollution Due to Wind and Solar Generation EPA’s AVERT Model

AVERT Regions

• AVERT characterizes how each power plant

in each region responds to different load • In other words: AVERT estimates which

power plants would likely have been turned up if wind and solar power generation had not been available in each hour of each year o

AVERT also estimates the air pollution emissions characteristics of those plants given the type of load seen at the specific hour

Possible limitations to use of AVERT: (1) intermediate approach in terms of complexity and accuracy; (2) presumes cap-and-trade programs are nonbinding; (3) insensitive to location within AVERT regions and does not fully consider cross-region interactions; (4) only treats marginal changes 19

Determine Avoided Carbon Dioxide and Air Pollution Due to Wind and Solar Generation u CO2, NOx, and SO2 emissions provided by AVERT q

Emission reductions are based on combustion-only estimates and do not include full life-cycle impacts

u PM2.5 emissions estimated as a function of generation

reduction (MWh) by plant type and state (as calculated by AVERT) and state-level PM2.5 emission factors (g/MWh) u Emissions estimates do not fully account for changes to

power plant ramping and cycling, although studies indicate these impacts are relatively minor and will not fundamentally alter the results presented here q

Oates and Jaramillo (2013); Valentino et al. (2012); Lew et al. (2013)

20

2. Determine the Avoided Combustion-Based Electricity Generation Due to Wind and Solar Generation and the Associated Avoided Carbon Dioxide and Air Pollution Emissions Results 21

Avoided CO2 per MWh from Wind & Solar has been Relatively Constant Over Time 3.0#

0.7#

2.5#

0.6# 2.0#

0.5# 0.4#

1.5#

0.3#

1.0#

billion2metric#tons#CO2###

Avoided#CO2#(metric2tons)#/#MWh#

0.8#

• Figure shows national averages and total; regional variations not depicted here

0.2# 0.1#

Avoided#CO2#/#MWh2Wind# Avoided#CO2#/#MWh2Solar# Total#CO2#Power#Sector#Emissions#(right)#

0.5#

0.0# 0.0# 2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#

Given location and temporal output profile, wind generation has historically offset more carbon per MWh than solar; emissions offset rates have been relatively constant over time despite drop in total power-sector emissions 22

Reductions in Power-Sector SO2 Lead to a Reduced Rate of Avoided SO2 from Wind

Avoided#SO2#(kg)#/#MWh#

1.2# 1.0#

10.0# 9.0# 8.0# 7.0# 6.0#

0.8# 0.6# 0.4#

5.0# 4.0# 3.0#

million2metric#tons#SO2##

1.4#

Avoided#SO2#/#MWh2Wind# Avoided#SO2#/#MWh2Solar# Total#SO2#Power#Sector#Emissions#(right)#

• Figure shows national averages and total; regional variations not depicted here

2.0# 0.2#

1.0#

0.0# 0.0# 2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#

Solar power does not show same decline in the rate of avoided SO2 due to its expansion over time into regions outside of California and the Southwest; wind generation has historically offset more SO2 per MWh 23

0.8#

4.0#

0.7#

3.5#

0.6#

3.0#

0.5#

2.5#

0.4#

2.0#

0.3#

1.5#

0.2#

1.0#

0.1#

Avoided#NOx#/#MWh2Wind# Avoided#NOx#/#MWh2Solar# Total#NOx#Power#Sector#Emissions#(right)#

• Figure shows national averages and total; regional variations not depicted here million2metric#tons#NOx#

Avoided#NOx#(kg)#/#MWh#

Reductions in Power-Sector NOx Lead to a Reduced Rate of Avoided NOx from Wind

0.5#

0.0# 0.0# 2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#

Solar power does not show same decline in the rate of avoided NOx due to its expansion over time into regions outside of California and the Southwest; wind generation has historically offset more NOx per MWh 24

Avoided PM2.5 Emissions Rate for Wind and Solar Follow a Decreasing trend after 2010 Avoided"PM2.5"(kg)"/"MWh"

0.09" 0.08" 0.07"

Avoided"PM2.5"/"MWh5Wind" Avoided"PM2.5"/"MWh5Solar" Total"PM2.5"Power"Sector"Emissions"(right)"

400" 350" 300"

0.06"

250"

0.05"

200"

0.04"

150"

0.03" 0.02" 0.01"

100"

thousand5metric"tons"PM2.5""

0.10"

• Figure shows national averages and total; regional variations not depicted here • Total PM2.5 power sector emissions are based on the EPA National Emissions Inventory, with the most recent finalized data from 2011

50"

0.00" 0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

25

Annual Total Emissions Avoided from Wind and Solar Power CO2 SO2 140"

180"

Avoided"CO2"from"Wind"

160"

Avoided"CO2"from"Solar"

120" 100" 80" 60" 40" 20" 0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

Annual"Avoided"SO2"" (thousand"metric?tons)"

Annual"Avoided"CO2""(million"metric=tons)"

160"

Avoided"SO2"from"Wind" Avoided"SO2"from"Solar"

140" 120" 100" 80" 60" 40" 20" 0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

Although the average SO2 emission rate from coal plants was reduced throughout the time period, the overall growth rate in wind and solar power generation leads to higher total avoided emissions 26

Annual Total Emissions Avoided from Wind and Solar Power NOx PM2.5 Annual"Avoided"NOx"" (thousand"metric@tons)"

100"

9"

Avoided"NOx"from"Wind"

8"

Avoided"NOx"from"Solar"

80" 60" 40" 20" 0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

Annual"Avoided"PM2.5""" (thousand"metric@tons)"

120"

7" 6" 5" 4" 3" 2" 1"

Avoided"PM2.5"from"Wind" Avoided"PM2.5"from"Solar"

0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

Avoided PM2.5 emissions were estimated as a post-processing step to AVERT based on limited available data regarding PM2.5 emission rates. Emission rates in 2015 are ~1/5th those of 2010 (following Cai et al. 2012, 2013). Emission rates prior to 2010 were held at 2010 levels. Both of these are conservative assumptions (avoided PM2.5 emissions might be higher). While SO2 and NOx emissions are directly measured at the stack of every large power plant, PM2.5 emission rates are based on detailed engineering estimates. 27

3. Estimate Avoided Climate Impacts (monetized value) and Avoided Health Impacts (incidences and monetized value) Methods

28

Estimating Avoided Climate Impacts from CO2 u Monetized CO2 benefits based on a meta-analysis of ‘Social Cost of

Carbon’ (SCC) estimates (e.g., Tol 2008; 2011; 2013) q

SCC includes global impacts on agricultural productivity, human health, property damages, and ecosystem services

u Central value: ranges from $34 – $41 per MTCO2 from 2007–2015 q

Central value based on median value from Tol (2013) meta-analysis

q

Similar to U.S. Interagency Working Group (IWG) “central value” SCC

u To capture significant uncertainty in and variation across SCC estimates,

a lower estimate based on work by Havranek et al. (2015) is applied, as is a higher estimate based on van den Bergh and Botzen (2014) q q

Lower and higher estimates span very wide range: $0.0 and $125 per MTCO2 (in 2010) These values roughly bracket the meta-analysis from Tol (2013) with zero and 125 $ per MTCO2 equaling approximately the 25th and 85th percentile of all estimates

u Appendix C shows results calculated with the Interagency Working

Group (IWG) SCC, used recently in U.S. regulatory proceedings 29

Estimating Avoided Health Impacts from SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 u Monetized air quality benefits with multiple methods q

EPA benefit-per-ton impact analysis (low and high values)*‡

q

EPA COBRA model (low and high values)*

q

EASIUR model (low and high values)*

q

APEEP model version 2 (AP2)*‡

u Each approach covers pollution transport, transformation,

exposure, and impactà but each does so differently, covering varying impact pathways u Models account for *particulate matter and ‡ozone exposure u EPA and EASIUR “low” and “high” estimates are based on range

in literature on impact of pollution on health outcomes u Central value is reported based on simple average of all estimates

30

3. Estimate Avoided Climate Impacts (monetized value) and Avoided Health Impacts (incidences and monetized value) Results

31

CO2 Avoided Climate Impacts (¢/kWh-Wind): Higher in Regions with Greater Coal Offset 3.5#

1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

Benefits increase over time as SCC increases

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.5#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.5#

1.0#

2007#

2015#

2013#

These values are based on the SCC Central Value

2.0# 1.5#

1.5#

0.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2.5# 2009#

0.0#

2.0#

2011#

2015#

3.0#

0.5#

2.5#

2009#

0.0#

3.5#

2007#

3.0#

0.5# 0.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

3.5#

2007#

2015#

2.5#

1.0#

0.5#

1.5# 1.0#

0.5#

1.5#

0.0#

2.0#

3.0#

2.0#

1.0#

0.5#

2.5#

2007#

0.0#

1.5#

2013#

1.0#

2.0#

2011#

3.0#

2.5#

2009#

3.5#

3.0#

2007#

1.5#

2015#

0.0#

3.5#

1.0# 2013#

0.0#

2015#

2.0# 2013#

0.5#

1.0#

2013#

1.5#

0.5#

3.5#

2011#

1.0#

2.5#

1.5#

2009#

2.0#

1.0#

0.5#

2007#

1.5#

3.0#

2.0#

0.0#

2.5#

1.5#

2011#

2.5#

2.0# 3.5#

2009#

3.0#

3.0#

2.0#

2007#

3.5#

2.5#

2011#

2.5#

3.5#

2009#

3.0#

3.0#

2007#

3.5#

32

CO2 Avoided Climate Impacts (¢/kWh-Solar): Regional Results Very Similar to Wind 3.5#

2015#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2015#

2013#

2011#

1.0#

0.0#

Benefits increase over time as SCC increases

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.5#

2015#

1.0#

2013#

0.5#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

These values are based on the SCC Central Value

2.0# 1.5#

1.5#

0.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2.5#

2009#

0.0#

2.0#

0.5#

0.0#

3.0#

0.5#

2.5#

1.0#

0.5#

3.5#

2007#

3.0#

1.5#

1.0#

2011#

2013#

2011#

2009#

3.5#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2.5# 2.0#

0.0#

1.5#

1.5# 1.0#

0.5#

0.0#

0.5#

2.0#

2.0#

3.0#

0.0#

0.0#

2.5#

2007#

1.0#

1.0#

2.5#

2009#

1.0#

0.0#

3.5#

0.5#

3.0#

0.5#

1.5#

1.5#

3.0#

2007#

2.0#

1.0#

3.5#

2009#

1.5#

2.0#

2007#

0.0#

3.5#

1.5#

2015#

2.0#

2.5#

2013#

0.5#

2.0#

2011#

2.5#

2015#

1.0#

2013#

3.0#

2011#

2.5#

1.5#

2009#

3.0#

3.5#

2007#

3.5#

2.0#

3.0#

2009#

2.5#

2.5#

2007#

3.0#

3.5#

2007#

3.0# 3.5#

33

SO2 Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Wind): Regional Variations, Decrease with Time 24" 22"

8" 12" 10" 8"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2015"

2013"

2011"

• • • •

EPA Low and High COBRA Low and High EASIUR Low and High AP2

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2009"

0"

2"

2007"

2"

4"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2007"

4"

6"

0"

8" 6"

8"

2"

2015"

2013"

2011"

10"

10"

4"

These central estimate values are based on the average of:

12"

2009"

6"

2015"

0"

4"

0"

12"

0"

4" 2"

2007"

8"

0"

6"

2"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

10" 2007"

0"

2015"

12"

2"

2"

6" 2013"

0"

8"

8"

2011"

4"

2"

10"

2009"

2"

4"

0"

4"

6"

10"

2013"

2015"

2013"

2011"

8"

4"

12"

6" 2009"

0"

2007"

10"

6"

2011"

2"

2007"

12"

12"

2009"

4"

6"

2007"

6"

8"

14"

2015"

8"

10"

16"

2013"

10"

12"

18"

2011"

10"

20"

2009"

12"

2007"

12"

34

SO2 Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Solar): Slightly Lower than Wind in Some Regions 24" 22"

8" 12" 10" 8"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2007"

4"

2015"

2013"

• • • •


2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2"

2011"

0"

2009"

4"

2007"

2"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

8" 6"

6"

0"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

10"

8"

2"


12"

10"

4"

2015"

4"

0"

12"

6"

0"

0"

2007"

8"

0"

4" 2"

2"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

10" 2007"

0"

2015"

12"

2"

2"

6"

6" 2013"

0"

8"

8"

2011"

4"

2" 0"

2009"

2"

4"

10"

4"

6"

10"

2013"

2015"

2013"

2011"

8"

4"

12"

6" 2009"

0"

2007"

10"

6"

2011"

2"

2007"

12"

12"

2009"

4"

6"

2007"

6"

8"

14"

2015"

8"

10"

16"

2013"

10"

12"

18"

2011"

10"

20"

2009"

12"

2007"

12"

35

NOx Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Wind): Lower and Less Regional Variation than SO2 2.0#

2.0#

1.5#

1.5#

1.5#

1.5#

1.0#

1.0#

1.5#

0.0#

1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.0# 0.0#

2015#

0.5#

0.0#

2013#

2.0#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

0.5#

0.5#

2007#

0.5#

2015#

1.5#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

2.0#

2007#

1.0#

2.0# 1.5#

2.0#

2.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2.0#

2009#

0.5#

2007#

1.0#


2.0# 1.5# 1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

• • • •


2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.5#

0.5# 0.0#

2015#

2013#

1.0#

2011#

0.0#

2015#

1.5#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

2.0#

2009#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

1.5#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.5# 0.0#

36

NOx Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Solar): Results Similar to Wind 2.0#

2.0#

1.5#

1.5#

1.5#

1.5#

1.0#

1.0#

1.5#

0.0#

1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.0# 0.0#

2015#

0.5#

0.0#

2013#

2.0#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

0.5#

0.5#

2007#

0.5#

2015#

1.5#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

2.0#

2007#

1.0#

2.0# 1.5#

2.0#

2.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2.0#

2009#

0.5#

2007#

1.0#


2.0# 1.5# 1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

• • • •


2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.5#

0.5# 0.0#

2015#

2013#

1.0#

2011#

0.0#

2015#

1.5#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

2.0#

2009#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

1.5#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.5# 0.0#

37

PM2.5 Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Wind): Regional Variations, Decrease with Time 2.5#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.0#

2015#

1.0#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

1.5#

0.0#

2009#

2.0#

0.5#

2007#

1.0#

1.0#

0.5#

2015#

0.0#

2.5#

1.5#

1.0#

2013#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

0.5#

1.5#

2007#

2.0#

2.0#

2.0#

1.5#

2011#

0.5#

1.0#

2009#

1.0#

2.5#

2007#

1.5#

2.5#

2.0#

1.5#

2.0#

2.5#

2.5#

2.0#

2.5#

0.5#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2.5#

2007#

1.5# 1.0# 2.5#

2.0#


2.0# 1.5# 1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

• • • •


2015#

2013#

2009#

2007#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.5#

0.5# 0.0#

2015#

2013#

1.0#

2011#

0.0#

2015#

1.5#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

2.0#

2009#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

2011#

1.5#

2007#

2.5#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.5# 0.0#

38

PM2.5 Avoided Health Impacts (¢/kWh-Solar): Slightly Lower than Wind in Some Regions 2.5#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.0#

2015#

1.0#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

1.5#

0.0#

2009#

2.0#

0.5#

2007#

1.0#

1.0#

0.5#

2015#

0.0#

2.5#

1.5#

1.0#

2013#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

0.5#

1.5#

2007#

2.0#

2.0#

2.0#

1.5#

2011#

0.5#

1.0#

2009#

1.0#

2.5#

2007#

1.5#

2.5#

2.0#

1.5#

2.0#

2.5#

2.5#

2.0#

2.5#

0.5#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2.5#

2007#

1.5# 1.0#


2.5#

2.0# 0.5#

2.0# 1.5# 1.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

• • • •


2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

0.5#

0.5# 0.0#

2015#

1.0#

2013#

0.0#

2011#

1.5#

2015#

0.5#

2013#

2.0#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

2.5#

1.5#

2009#

2007#2009#2011#2013#2015#

2007#

0.0#

39

National Avoided Climate Damages: Literature Based SCC, Large Uncertainty Wind

Solar 3.5#

18"

SCC"Low"

16"

SCC"Central"Value"

14" 12"

Avoided#Climate#Change#Damages## (billions#2015$)#

Avoided"Climate"Change"Damages"" (billions"2015$)"

20"

SCC"High"

10" 8" 6" 4" 2"

3.0# 2.5# 2.0#

SCC#Low# SCC#Central#Value# SCC#High#

1.5# 1.0# 0.5# 0.0#

0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#

2007 - 2015 Total Benefits (Billions 2015$)

2015

Avg. Marginal Benefits (¢/kWh)

Total Benefits (Billions 2015$)


Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Wind

29.0

0.0 – 98.5

2.8

0.0 – 9.4

5.7

0.0 – 19.3

3.0

0.0 – 10.2

Solar

2.5

0.0 – 8.3

2.2

0.0 – 7.5

0.9

0.0 – 2.9

2.3

0.0 – 7.8 40

National Avoided Air Pollution Damages: Significant Uncertainty in Magnitude Central"Es6mate"

1.6#

COBRA"High" EPA"High" EASIUr"High" COBRA"Low" EPA"Low" EASIUR"Low" AP2"

16" 14" 12" 10"

Avoided#Air#Pollu7on#Damages# (billions#2015$)#

Avoided"Air"Pollu6on"Damages" (billions"2015$)"

18"

Wind

8" 6" 4" 2"

1.4# 1.2# 1.0# 0.8#

Solar Central#Es7mate# COBRA#High# EPA#High# EASIUr#High# COBRA#Low# EPA#Low# EASIUR#Low# AP2#

0.6# 0.4# 0.2# 0.0#

0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#

The central estimate is the simple average of the suite of other estimates


2015




Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Wind

57.6

28.4 – 107.9

5.5

2.7 – 10.3

8.7

4.3 – 15.9

4.6

2.3 – 8.4

Solar

2.5

1.3 – 4.9

2.2

1.1 – 4.4

0.7

0.4 – 1.4

1.8

1.0 – 3.6 41

National Avoided Air Pollution Mortalities 1800"

160"

Central"Es?mate" COBRA"Low"

1600"

COBRA"High"

1400"

EPA"Low"

1200"

EPA"High"

Avoided"Incidence"of"Premature" Mortality"from"Air"Pollu?on"

Avoided"Incidence"of"Premature" Mortality"from"Air"Pollu?on"

2000"

Wind

1000" 800" 600" 400" 200"

140" 120" 100"

Solar Central"Es?mate" COBRA"Low" COBRA"High" EPA"Low" EPA"High"

80" 60" 40" 20" 0"

0" 2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

The central estimate is the simple average of the suite of other estimates

2017 - 2015

2015

Total Benefits (Avoided Mortalities)

Total Benefits (Avoided Mortalities)

Central

Range

Central

Range

Wind

7,700

4,000 – 12,200

1,100

600 – 1,700

Solar

300

200 – 500

90

40 – 150 42

Total Regional Avoided Climate & Air Pollution Damages: Wind ($ Billion, central case) 5.0# 4.5#

5.0#

4.0#

4.5#

3.5#

4.0#

3.0#

3.5#

2.5#

3.0#

2.0#

2.5#

5.0#

1.5#

2.0#

0.4#

0.8#

4.5#

1.0#

1.5#

0.2#

0.6#

4.0#

0.5#

3.5#

0.0#

2015#

2013#

0.0#

3.5# 3.0#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2015#

2011#

2013#

2015#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

2013#

0.2#

0.5#

2011#

1.0#

2009#

0.4#

2007#

1.5#

0.0#

2009#

2015#

0.6#

2.0#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.0#

1.0# 0.8#

2.5#

All regions benefit from wind, including the Southeast – mostly from imported wind generation.

2015#

0.5#

4.0#

0.2#

2013#

1.5# 1.0#

4.5#

0.4#

0.0#

2.0#

2009#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2011#

5.0#

0.6# 2009#

2009#

0.8#

0.0#

0.5#

2.5# 2007#

0.0#

0.6#

2007#

0.2#

2007#

2015#

2013#

2011#

3.0#

1.0#

2007#

In some regions, climate 0.6# benefits dominate; in 0.4# others health-related air 0.2# pollution benefits are the 0.0# dominant driver of total benefits.

2009#

0.0#

0.8#

0.4#

0.8#

1.0#

2013#

0.2#

1.0#

2011#

0.4#

2011#

1.0#

0.6#

2009#

0.8#

2007#

1.0#

1.0#

2007#

Climate Benefits Air Quality Benefits

2007#

The largest wind power benefits accrued in the Mid-West, Great Lakes/Mid-Atlantic, Central, and Texas regions. Note the larger scale for those regions compared others.

Note: benefits are assigned to regions based on where wind was delivered 43

Total Regional Avoided Climate & Air Pollution Damages: Solar ($ Billion, central case)

0.2#

0.0#

2015#

0.1#

0.6#

0.0#

201

201

201

0.3#

200

0.2#

200

0.4#

0.6#

0.2#

0.1#

2015#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.0#

2007#

2013#

2011#

2009#

0.1#

2007#

2015#

0.3#

2013#

0.5#

2011#

0.4#

2009#

0.1#

2007#

0.5#

0.0#

201

0.2#

0.2#

0.0#

201

0.0#

201

0.1#

200

2013#

2011#

2009#

2007#

0.2#

200

2015#

0.3#

2013#

0.0#

2011#

0.4#

2009#

0.1#

0.3#

0.0#

0.1#

0.3#

0.1#

0.5#

2007#

0.4#

2015#

0.1#

2013#

0.5#

2015#

0.2#

2013#

0.0#

2011#

0.3#

2009#

0.1#

0.6#

2015#

0.4#

0.2#

0.4#

2013#

0.2#

0.2#

2011#

0.3#

2011#

0.5#

0.6#

2009#

0.5# 0.3#

2009#

0.3#

0.3#

0.0# Benefits are increasing rapidly over time with growth in solar. But total benefits are lower than wind partly because of lower solar output, but also because solar deployment has focused on areas with more gas and less coal.

0.4#

2007#

0.6#

2007#

0.4#

0.6# 0.4#

0.4#

0.5#

0.5#

0.5#

0.5#

0.6#

0.6#

0.6#

0.6#

2007#

California benefits are mostly in the form of climate benefits while the majority of benefits in the Great Lakes/Mid-Atlantic come from air quality.


2015#

Largest benefits accrued in the Great Lakes/MidAtlantic and California regions.

Note: benefits are assigned to regions based on where solar was delivered 44

Marginal Regional Avoided Climate & Air Pollution Damages: Wind (¢/kWh-Wind, central case)

24"

0"

9"

21"

6"

18"

3"

3"

15"

0"

0"

12"

2015"

2015"

2013"

9"

2011"

6"

2009"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2007"

9"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

0"

2015"

12"

3"

2013"

3"

6"

2011"

27"

2015"

15"

2013"

6"

2011"

18"

9"

2009"

0"

9"

6" 3"

0"

21"

12"

18"

9"

15"

6"

12"

3"

9"

0"

6"

2015"

2013"

2011"

0"

2009"

3" 2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2007"

2015"

24"

15"

2013"

3"

2011"

27"

18"

2009"

21"

6"

0"

2007"

9"

2015"

24"

2013"

12"

2011"

27"

2009"

15"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

0"

3"

12"

21"

12"

18"

3"

6"

15"

12"

21"

6"

9"

18"

24"

24"

9"

12"

21"

15"

27"

12"

15"

24"

27"

2007"

15"

18"

27"

18"

2009"

18"

15"

30"

2007"

18"

2007"

21"

21"

21"

21"

24"

24"

24"

24"

27"

27"

27"

27"

2009"

Although there are some regional differences in marginal climate benefits, these differences are small compared to the regional differences in marginal air quality benefits.


2007"

The largest marginal wind power benefits accrued in the Mid-West and Great Lakes/MidAtlantic regions, dominated by air quality improvements; those marginal benefits have decreased with time but remain very high.

Note: benefits are assigned to regions based on where wind was delivered 45

Marginal Regional Avoided Climate & Air Pollution Damages: Solar (¢/kWh-Solar, central case)

0"

9"

21"

6"

18"

3"

15"

0"

12"

2015"

2013"

2011"

21"

2009"

24"

2007"

27"

2015"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2007"

3" 0"

9" 3"

0"

21"

12"

18"

9"

15"

6"

12"

3"

9"

0"

6"

2015"

2013"

2011"

0"

2009"

3" 2007"

2013"

2011"

2009"

2015"

24"

15"

2013"

3"

2011"

27"

18"

2009"

21"

6"

0"

2007"

9"

2015"

24"

2013"

12"

2011"

27"

2009"

15"

2007"

2015"

2013"

2011"

0"

6"

6"

18" 2009"

0"

2015"

24"

2013"

12"

3"

9"

2011"

3"

3"

6"

12"

2015"

27"

9"

15"

2013"

15"

6"

12"

18"

2011"

6"

9"

15"

21"

2009"

18"

12"

18"

24"

2007"

9"

2015"

21"

2013"

12"

2011"

24"

2009"

15"

2007"

27"

27"

2009"

15"

18"

2007"

Overall the marginal benefits of solar are relatively similar to those of wind.

18"

21"

2007"

Although there are some 15" 12" regional differences in 9" marginal climate benefits, 6" 3" these differences are small 0" compared to the regional differences in marginal air quality benefits.

21"

21"

24"

18"

24"

24"

27"

21"

27"

27"

2007"


2015"

The largest marginal solar power benefits accrued in the Mid-West and Great Lakes/Mid-Atlantic regions, dominated by air quality; marginal benefits have decreased with time 27" but remain very high. 24"

Note: benefits are assigned to regions based on where solar was delivered 46

Conclusions

47

Conclusions: Total Benefits 2007 - 2015

Wind

• Climate Savings: $29 Billion (range 0.0-98.5); 2.8 ¢/kWh (range 0.0 – 8.3) • Air Pollution Savings: $58 Billion (range 28-108); 5.5 ¢/kWh (range 2.7 – 10.3) • Avoided Premature Mortalities: 7,700 (range 4,000 – 12,200)

Solar

• Climate Savings: $2.5 Billion (range 0.0 – 8.3); 2.2 ¢/kWh (range 0.0 – 7.5) • Air Pollution Savings: $2.5 Billion (range 1.3 – 4.9); 2.2 ¢/kWh (range 1.1 – 4.4) • Avoided Premature Mortalities: 300 (range 200 – 500)

Total benefits from wind exceed solar in large measure because of greater historical generation levels; marginal ¢/kWh benefits are also greater for wind, due largely to the fact that wind has historically been deployed in more coal-heavy regions 48

Conclusions: Total Benefits in 2015 Alone

Wind

• Climate Savings: $5.7 Billion (range 0-19); 3.0 ¢/kWh (range 0.0 – 10.2) • Air Pollution Savings: $8.7 Billion (range 4-16); 4.6 ¢/kWh (range 2.3 – 8.4) • Avoided Premature Mortalities: 1,100 (range 600 – 1,700)

Solar

• Climate Savings: $0.9 Billion (range 0.0 – 2.9); 2.3 ¢/kWh (range 0.0 – 7.8) • Air Pollution Savings: $0.7 Billion (range 0.4 – 1.4); 1.8 ¢/kWh (range 1.0 – 3.6) • Avoided Premature Mortalities: 90 (range 40 – 150)

Total benefits from wind exceed solar in large measure because of greater 2015 generation; marginal ¢/kWh benefits are also greater for wind, due largely to the fact that wind has historically been deployed in more coal-heavy regions 49

Conclusions: Regional Variations in Benefits in 2015 (Billion $, central case) 6.0#

Solar power produced greater benefits than wind power in 2015 in the Southwest and California, with the reverse being true in the rest of the country.

6.0#


5.0# 5.0#

1.0#

4.0#

1.0#

0.8#

4.0# 3.0#

0.8# 1.0#

0.6#

0.8#

0.4# 1.0#

0.2#

0.8#

0.0# Solar#

0.6# 1.0#

2.0#

0.2#

1.0#

0.0#

4.0#

0.4#

0.4#

1.0#

5.0#

0.6#

Wind#

Wind#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

Solar#

0.0# 0.2#

Wind#

3.0#

Solar#

0.0#

0.4#

Wind# 0.8#

0.2#

2.0#

6.0#

0.6#

3.0#

Solar#

2.0#

6.0# 1.0#

0.6#

0.0# Wind#

5.0#

Solar#

0.0#

0.4#

Wind#

4.0#

Solar#

1.0# 0.8#

0.2# 3.0#

0.6#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

2.0#

0.4#

1.0#

0.2# 0.0#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

Wind#

Solar#

50

Conclusions: Regional Variations in Benefits in 2015 (¢/kWh, central case) Marginal climate and air quality benefits were near parity between solar and wind in 2015.


16.0#

14.0#

10.0#

14.0#

12.0#

8.0#

12.0#

6.0#

10.0#

4.0#

8.0#

2.0#

6.0#

14.0#

8.0#

12.0#

6.0#

10.0#

4.0# 14.0#

2.0#

12.0#

0.0#

6.0# Solar#

14.0#

4.0#

4.0#

Wind#

Solar#

Wind#

Solar#

6.0# 4.0# 2.0# 0.0# Wind#

Solar#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

6.0# 4.0# 2.0#

8.0#

0.0#

8.0#

8.0#

10.0#

2.0#

10.0#

2.0#

10.0#

0.0#

12.0#

Solar#

12.0#

2.0#

8.0#

Wind#

14.0#

12.0#

4.0#

0.0#

8.0#

Wind#

6.0#

14.0#

12.0#

10.0#

10.0#

14.0#

0.0# Wind#

14.0#

6.0#

14.0#

12.0#

4.0#

12.0#

10.0#

2.0#

10.0#

8.0#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

Solar#

8.0#

6.0#

6.0#

4.0#

4.0#

2.0#

2.0#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

0.0# Wind#

Solar#

51

A Few Relevant Comparisons u Wind and solar may not be the least-expensive means of achieving these

benefits, and costs, impacts, and other benefits deserve full consideration u Central value national air pollution and climate benefits in 2015 estimated at 7.6

¢/kWh (wind) and 4.1 ¢/kWh (solar), but with significant variation over time and geography, and with wide range of estimates given underlying uncertainties u Compares to: q

q

q

q

Recent renewable energy certificate prices for wind as high as 5 ¢/kWh in New England, 2 ¢/kWh in Mid-Atlantic, less than 0.5 ¢/kWh in most other regions For solar “carve-outs” in RPS programs, REC prices can be as high as 50 ¢/kWh, but often much lower Recent wind power purchase agreement prices of ~2-3 ¢/kWh, and solar purchase agreement prices of 3-6 ¢/kWh (note, these prices include federal tax incentives) Wind production tax credit of 2.3 ¢/kWh, 10-yrs; solar 30% investment tax credit

52

References 1. Cai, H., M. Wang, A. Elgowainy, and J. Han. 2012. Updated Greenhouse Gas and Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Factors and Their Probability Distribution Functions for Electric Generating Units. ANL/ESD/12-2. Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL (US). http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/1045758. 2. Cai, H., M. Wang, A. Elgowainy, and J. Han. 2013. Updated Greenhouse Gas and Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Factors of the U.S. Electric Generating Units in 2010. Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL (US). 3. Driscoll, C.T., J.J. Buonocore, J.I. Levy, K.F. Lambert, D. Burtraw, S.B. Reid, H. Fakhraei, and J. Schwartz. 2015. “US Power Plant Carbon Standards and Clean Air and Health Co-Benefits.” Nature Climate Change 5: 535–40. 4. Havranek T., Irsova Z., Janda K., and D Zilberman. 2015. “Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon.” Energy Economics 51 (2015) 394–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.08.009. 5. Lew, D., G. Brinkman, E. Ibanez, A. Florita, M. Heaney, B.-M. Hodge, M. Hummon, G. Stark, J. King, and S.A. Lefton. 2013. The Western Wind and Solar Integration Study Phase 2. NREL/TP-5500-55588. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 6. NRC (National Research Council). 2010. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use. National Research Council of the National Academies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 7. Oates, D.L., and P. Jaramillo. 2013. “Production Cost and Air Emissions Impacts of Coal Cycling in Power Systems with Large-Scale Wind Penetration.” Environmental Research Letters 8(2): 024022. 8. Siler-Evans, K., I.M. Azevedo, M.G. Morgan, and J. Apt. 2013. “Regional Variations in the Health, Environmental, and Climate Benefits of Wind and Solar Generation.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(29): 11768–73. 9. Tol R.S.J. 2008. “The social cost of carbon: trends, outliers and catastrophes.” Econ. Open-Access, Open-Assess. E-J. 2 (25), 1–22. 10. Tol R.S.J. 2011. “The social cost of carbon.” Ann. Rev. Resour. Econ. 3 (1), 419–443. 11. Tol R.S.J., 2013. “Targets for global climate policy: an overview.” J. Econ. Dyn. Control. 37 (5), 911–928. 12. Valentino, L., V. Valenzuela, A. Botterud, Z. Zhou, and G. Conzelmann. 2012. “System-Wide Emissions Implications of Increased Wind Power Penetration.” Environmental Science & Technology 46(7): 4200–206. 13. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Botzen, W.J.W., 2014. “A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions.” Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 253–258. 

53

Appendix A: Wind Power -- Avoided Emissions by State

54

2007 CO2 Avoided Emissions from Wind

55


56


57

2007 SO2 Avoided Emissions from Wind

58


59


60

2007 NOx Avoided Emissions from Wind

61


62


63

2007 PM2.5 Avoided Emissions from Wind

64


65


66

Appendix B: Solar Power -- Avoided Emissions by State

67

2007 CO2 Avoided Emissions from Solar

68


69


70

2007 SO2 Avoided Emissions from Solar

71


72


73

2007 NOx Avoided Emissions from Solar

74


75


76

2007 PM2.5 Avoided Emissions from Solar

77


78


79

Appendix C: ‘Social Cost of Carbon’ (SCC) Valuation based on the U.S. Interagency Working Group Estimates

80

Estimating Avoided Climate and Health Impacts from CO2 u Monetized CO2 benefits based on four U.S.

Interagency Working Group ‘Social Cost of Carbon’ (SCC) estimates u Central Value: ranges from $31 – $40 per MTCO2

from 2007 – 2015 u SCC includes global impacts on agricultural

productivity, human health, property damages, and ecosystem services

81

National Avoided Climate Damages IWG SCC Wind 2.5#

SCC"Low"

14"

Avoided#Climate#Change#Damages## (billions#2015$)#

Avoided"Climate"Change"Damages"" (billions"2015$)"

16"

Solar

SCC"Central"Value"

12"

SCC"High"

10"

SCC"HigherGthanGExp."

8" 6" 4" 2" 0"

2.0#

SCC#Low# SCC#Central#Value# SCC#High#

1.5#

SCC#HigherGthanGExp.#

1.0# 0.5# 0.0#

2007" 2008" 2009" 2010" 2011" 2012" 2013" 2014" 2015"

2007# 2008# 2009# 2010# 2011# 2012# 2013# 2014# 2015#


2015




Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Central

Range

Wind

25.5

8.3 – 72.5

2.4

0.8 – 6.9

5.1

1.6 – 14.9

2.7

0.8 – 7.9

Solar

2.2

0.7 – 6.3

2.0

0.6 – 5.6

0.8

0.2 – 2.3

2.1

0.6 – 6.0 82