californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
Working Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ector by 2030 with the aid of battery storageAbstract: The costs of solar photovoltaics (PV). Wind, and battery storage have fallen by approximately 65% to 85% since 2010 and are projected to decline further in the near future—creating opportunities for aggressive power-sector decarbonization that w californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ere seldom envisioned even a few years ago. We assess the ability of large-scale PV and wind deployment in conjunction with modest amounts of batterycaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
storage to enable near-complete decarbonization of California’s power sector by 2030. Our study improves on previous analyses by accounting for the drWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ge costs do not decline further, a carbon-free generation share of 80% can be achieved by 2030 in California at a total system cost lower than the cost in a baseline noadditional-clean* energy scenario. If costs decline at half the rate observed since 2010. 95% carbon-free generation IS feasible at californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6a total system cost similar to the cost in a baseline scenario. This IS the first study to suggest California could cost-effectively achieve near-compcaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
lete power-sector decarbonization by 2030 using existing teclmologies. The results also indicate potential for similar opportunities in other regions Working Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6omic sectors such as transportation, buildings, and industry.Authors:Amol Phadke, Nikit Abhyankar, Ran jit Deshniukh. JuliaSzinai, and Anand GopalLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryEnergy Analysis and Environmental Impacts DivisionInternational Energy Analysis Department43617DISCLAIMERThis Is a wo californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6rklug paper, therefore intended to facilitate discussion on research in progress. This paper represents the opinions of tire authors, and not meant tocaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
represent the position or opinions of the authors' institutions. Any errors arc the fault of the authors. Woridng paper* published under this Scries Working Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6 is believed to contain coircct information. neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or useful californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference hercaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
ein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by Its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute Working Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ornia. The views aud opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California.Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory' is an equal opportunity employerCOPYRIGHT NO californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6TICEThis manuscript has been authored by au author at Lawrence Berkeley' National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-ACO2-O5CHI1231 with the U.S. Departcaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
ment of Energy. The U.S. Government retains, and the publisher, byaccepting the article for publication, acknowledges, that the U.S. Government retainWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ol U.S. Government purposes.AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by the Hewlett Foundation wider Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory' Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.2Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power sector by 2030 with the aid of battery storageAmol Phadke, Nikit Abhyankar, californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6Ranjit Deshmukh, Julia Szinai, and Anand GopalABSTRACTThe costs of solar photovoltaics (PV), wind, and battery storage have fallen by approximately 65californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
% to 85% since 20Ĩ0 and are projected to decline further in the near future—creating opportunities for aggressive power-sector decarbonization that weWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6torage to enable near-complete decarbonization of California's power sector by 2030. Our study improves on previous analyses by accounting for the dramatic recent cost reductions and therefore assessing the possibility of more rapid decarbonization. We find that, even if renewable energy and storage californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6 costs do not decline further, a carbon-free generation share of 80% can be achieved by 2030 in California at a total system cost lower than the costcaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
in a baseline no-additional-clean-energy scenario. If costs decline at half the rate observed since 2010, 95% carbon-free generation is feasible at a Working Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6te power-sector decarbonization by 2030 using existing technologies. The results also indicate potential for similar opportunities in other regions of the world. This is especially important because power-sector decarbonization could catalyze electrification-based decarbonization across other econom californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ic sectors such as transportation, buildings, and industry.If current trends continue, the world is on a path toward warming by 3 degrees c by the endcaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
of the century, likely resulting in irreversible environmental, social, and economic impacts (!]. Many studies suggest an accelerated transition to lWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ion of end uses such as vehicles, industrial operations, and buildings [2], Producing carbon-free electricity is the key to enabling carbon-free electrification of these other sectors. Most analyses of near-complete power- sector decarbonization (80% decarbonization or greater) project achievement o californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6f this goal by no earlier than 2050 owing to high assumed renewable energy costs [3] [5].1 Such a timeframe provides little hope that climate change ccaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
ould be held to a manageable level in this century. However, these existing studies even those published only a few years ago—do not adequately capturWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6ld shift decarbonization assumptions to a timeframe commensurate with climaterealities while transforming the policy dialog about the feasibility and cost of near-term decarbonization.1 The one study [6] that assesses complete decarbonization of the U.S. power sector by 2030 does not assume a signif californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6icant role for battery storage, as our study does. Instead, it relies on expansion of the U.S. transmission network, v/hich is technically and economicaliforniapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
cally challenging |7|,https://khothuvien.cori!In this article, we use the latest renewable energy and battery cost trends to analyze the costs, benefiWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6 (GHGs) and a leader in climate change mitigation, making its technology and policy choices important within the United States and worldwide [2], [8], [9]. The state's existing policies mandate a 40% GHG reduction by 2030 (compared with 1990 levels), targeting an 80% reduction by 2050 (10), [11]. Re californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6cently passed state legislation, SB 100, also requires that investor-owned utilities produce 60% and 100% of their power from renewable sources by 203californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
0 and 2045 respectively, extending a prior mandate of 50% renewable energy by 2030 [12].Our analysis employs an industry-standard electricity productiWorking Paper 009International Energy Analysis DepartmentLawrence Berkeley National Laborator)’Cost-effective decarbonization of California's power se californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6renewable energy and battery cost reductions based on current trends. For different scenarios of generation portfolios, we use the production cost model to evaluate the operational behavior and the operating cost, and also evaluate the total capital cost of added renewable capacity. Because the assu californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6med cost reductions are a global phenomenon—and most countries and U.S. states have significant potential for generation from solar PV, wind, or both—californiapowerdecarbonizationdraft_v6
the results can also inform rapid power-sector decarbonization efforts in other regions.Cost Assumptions and Modeling ScenariosFigure 1 shows our windGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook