The environmental and cost implications of solar energy preferences in Renewable Portfolio Standards |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, G.G. Brown Laboratory, 2350 Hayward, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;2. Center for Sustainable Systems, School of Natural Resources & Environment, University of Michigan, 440 Church St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, G.G. Brown Laboratory, 2350 Hayward, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States;2. Center for Sustainable Systems, School of Natural Resources & Environment, University of Michigan, 440 Church St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States;1. School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, Changping, Beijing, 102206, China;2. State Grid Materials Department, Beijing, 100031, China;3. Beijing Key Laboratory of New Energy and Low-Carbon Development, North China Electric Power University, Beijing, 102206, China;1. College of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 211106, China;2. Research Center for Soft Energy Science, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 211106, China;3. Collaborative Innovation Center for Ecological Economics and Management, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu, 233030, China;4. School of Statistics and Applied Mathematics, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu, 233030, China;5. School of Accounting, Nanjing Audit University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211815, China;6. School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, 100081, Beijing, China;7. Yangtze Delta Region Academy of Beijing Institute of Technology, 314001, Jiaxing, China;1. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University, Box 90335, Durham, NC 27708, USA;2. College of Natural Resources, Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA;3. College of Forestry, Department of Forest Engineering, Resources & Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Many state-level Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) include preferences for solar generation, with goals of increasing the generation diversity, reducing solar costs, and encouraging local solar industries. Depending on their policy design, these preferences can impact the RPS program costs and emissions reduction. This study evaluates the impact of these policies on costs and emissions, coupling an economic dispatch model with optimized renewable site selection. Three policy designs of an increased RPS in Michigan are investigated: (1) 20% Solar Carve-Out, (2) 5% Distributed Generation Solar Carve-Out, and (3) 3× Solar Multiplier. The 20% Solar Carve-Out scenario was found to increase RPS costs 28%, while the 5% Distributed Generation Solar Carve-Out increased costs by 34%. Both of these solar preferences had minimal impact on total emissions. The 3× Solar Multiplier decreases total RPS program costs by 39%, but adds less than half of the total renewable generation of the other cases, significantly increasing emissions of CO2, NOx, and SO2 relative to an RPS without the solar credit multiplier. Sensitivity analysis of the installed cost of solar and the natural gas price finds small changes in the results of the Carve-Out cases, with a larger impact on the 3× Solar Multiplier. |
| |
| Keywords: | Renewable Portfolio Standard Economic dispatch Solar energy policy Renewable energy integration |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
