IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hae/wpaper/2014-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost Implications of GHG Regulation in Hawai�i

Author

Listed:
  • Makena Coffman

    (Department of Urban and Regional Planning Research, UHERO)

  • Paul Bernstein

    (Operations Research, UHERO)

  • Sherilyn Wee

    (UHERO, University of Hawai�i at Manoa)

Abstract

The State of Hawai�i and the U.S. are developing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction regulations in parallel. The State requires that economy-wide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is developing new source performance standards (NSPS) for new electricity generation units. The State Department of Health has proposed rules that would reduce existing large emitting electricity generating units by 16% from 2010 levels. The NSPS proposes GHG concentration limits for new electricity units. We use a comprehensive model of Hawai�i�s electricity sector to study the potential cost and GHG impacts of State and Federal GHG regulations. Given uncertainty about the final form and implementation of these regulations, we adopt a series of scenarios that bracket the range of possible outcomes. First we consider the State�s GHG cap (for existing units) and NSPS (for new units) being implemented at the facility level. Next, we consider the implications of allowing for partnering to meet the State GHG cap and the NSPS at a system-wide level. We also consider the case where the State GHG cap is extended to apply to both existing and new units. The current proposed State GHG rules exclude biogenic sources of emissions. We address the impacts of this decision through sensitivity analysis and explore the impact of GHG policy on new coal-fired units. We find that regulating GHGs at the facility level leads to greater reductions in GHG emissions but at higher cost. Over the 30-year period that we study, when biogenic sources of emissions are ignored, facility-level implementation of policy will add $3 billion to the cost of electricity generation at an average cost of $180/ton of GHG abatement. If biogenic sources of emissions are included within the accounting framework, abatement costs rise to $340/ton.

Suggested Citation

  • Makena Coffman & Paul Bernstein & Sherilyn Wee, 2014. "Cost Implications of GHG Regulation in Hawai�i," Working Papers 2014-5, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
  • Handle: RePEc:hae:wpaper:2014-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://uhero.hawaii.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/WP_2014-5.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2014
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hondo, Hiroki, 2005. "Life cycle GHG emission analysis of power generation systems: Japanese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 2042-2056.
    2. Zhang, ZhongXiang & Folmer, Henk, 1998. "Economic modelling approaches to cost estimates for the control of carbon dioxide emissions1," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 101-120, February.
    3. Malça, João & Freire, Fausto, 2011. "Life-cycle studies of biodiesel in Europe: A review addressing the variability of results and modeling issues," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 338-351, January.
    4. Coffman, Makena & Griffin, James P. & Bernstein, Paul, 2012. "An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions-weighted clean energy standards," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 122-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Makena Coffman & Paul Bernstein, 2015. "Linking Hawaii’s Islands with wind energy," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Makena Coffman & Paul Bernstein, 2013. "Economic Impacts of Inter-Island Energy in Hawaii," Working Papers 2013-16, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    3. Fangyi Li & Zhaoyang Ye & Xilin Xiao & Dawei Ma, 2019. "Environmental Benefits of Stock Evolution of Coal-Fired Power Generators in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, October.
    4. Jānis Krūmiņš & Māris Kļaviņš, 2023. "Investigating the Potential of Nuclear Energy in Achieving a Carbon-Free Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-31, April.
    5. Odeh, Naser A. & Cockerill, Timothy T., 2008. "Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 367-380, January.
    6. Shuhao Chang & Qiancheng Wang & Haihua Hu & Zijian Ding & Hansen Guo, 2018. "An NNwC MPPT-Based Energy Supply Solution for Sensor Nodes in Buildings and Its Feasibility Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Joshua M. Pearce, 2012. "Limitations of Nuclear Power as a Sustainable Energy Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-15, June.
    8. L. Hay & A. H. B. Duffy & R. I. Whitfield, 2017. "The S‐Cycle Performance Matrix: Supporting Comprehensive Sustainability Performance Evaluation of Technical Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 45-70, January.
    9. Zhou, X. & Fan, L.W. & Zhou, P., 2015. "Marginal CO2 abatement costs: Findings from alternative shadow price estimates for Shanghai industrial sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 109-117.
    10. Cha, Kyounghoon & Lim, Songtak & Hur, Tak, 2008. "Eco-efficiency approach for global warming in the context of Kyoto Mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 274-280, September.
    11. Wu, X.D. & Guo, J.L. & Chen, G.Q., 2018. "The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 358-369.
    12. Yu, Shiwei & Wei, Yi-Ming & Guo, Haixiang & Ding, Liping, 2014. "Carbon emission coefficient measurement of the coal-to-power energy chain in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 290-300.
    13. Varun & Prakash, Ravi & Bhat, I.K., 2010. "A figure of merit for evaluating sustainability of renewable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 1640-1643, August.
    14. Li, Jinying & Li, Sisi & Wu, Fan, 2020. "Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 456-468.
    15. Marimuthu, C. & Kirubakaran, V., 2013. "Carbon pay back period for solar and wind energy project installed in India: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 80-90.
    16. Graus, Wina & Worrell, Ernst, 2011. "Methods for calculating CO2 intensity of power generation and consumption: A global perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 613-627, February.
    17. Catalina Ferat Toscano & Cecilia Martin-del-Campo & Gabriela Moeller-Chavez & Gabriel Leon de los Santos & Juan-Luis François & Daniel Revollo Fernandez, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of a Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine with a Focus on the Chemicals Used in Water Conditioning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    18. Marvão Pereira, Alfredo & Marvão Pereira, Rui Manuel, 2010. "Is fuel-switching a no-regrets environmental policy? VAR evidence on carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic performance in Portugal," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 227-242, January.
    19. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Magne, Bertrand & Moreaux, Michel, 2006. "A Hotelling model with a ceiling on the stock of pollution," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2875-2904, December.
    20. Mahmud, M. A. Parvez & Huda, Nazmul & Farjana, Shahjadi Hisan & Lang, Candace, 2019. "A strategic impact assessment of hydropower plants in alpine and non-alpine areas of Europe," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 198-214.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hae:wpaper:2014-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: UHERO (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/heuhius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.