skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Distributed Energy Resources for Carbon Emissions Mitigation

Abstract

The era of publicly mandated GHG emissions restrictions inthe United States has begun with recent legislation in California andseven northeastern states. Commercial and industrial buildings canimprove the carbon-efficiency of end-use energy consumption by installingtechnologies such as on-site cogeneration of electricity and useful heatin combined heat and power systems, thermally-activated cooling, solarelectric and thermal equipment, and energy storage -- collectively termeddistributed energy resources (DER). This research examines a collectionof buildings in California, the Northeast, and the southern United Statesto demonstrate the effects of regional characteristics such as the carbonintensity of central electricity grid, the climate-driven demand forspace heating and cooling, and the availability of solar insolation. Theresults illustrate that the magnitude of a realistic carbon tax ($100/tC)is too small to incent significant carbon-reducing effects oneconomically optimal DER adoption. In large part, this is because costreduction and carbon reduction objectives are roughly aligned, even inthe absence of a carbon tax.

Authors:
;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley NationalLaboratory, Berkeley, CA (US)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
928725
Report Number(s):
LBNL-62871
R&D Project: E584EE; BnR: YN1901000; TRN: US200811%%309
DOE Contract Number:
DE-AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: ECEEE 2007 Summer Study, Cote de'Azur, France,June 4-9, 2007
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
32; 29; AVAILABILITY; CARBON; COGENERATION; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY CONSUMPTION; ENERGY STORAGE; INSOLATION; LEGISLATION; MITIGATION; POWER SYSTEMS; SPACE HEATING; carbon tax combined heat and power distributed energy resourcesgreenhouse gas optimization United States legislation

Citation Formats

Firestone, Ryan, and Marnay, Chris. Distributed Energy Resources for Carbon Emissions Mitigation. United States: N. p., 2007. Web.
Firestone, Ryan, & Marnay, Chris. Distributed Energy Resources for Carbon Emissions Mitigation. United States.
Firestone, Ryan, and Marnay, Chris. Tue . "Distributed Energy Resources for Carbon Emissions Mitigation". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/928725.
@article{osti_928725,
title = {Distributed Energy Resources for Carbon Emissions Mitigation},
author = {Firestone, Ryan and Marnay, Chris},
abstractNote = {The era of publicly mandated GHG emissions restrictions inthe United States has begun with recent legislation in California andseven northeastern states. Commercial and industrial buildings canimprove the carbon-efficiency of end-use energy consumption by installingtechnologies such as on-site cogeneration of electricity and useful heatin combined heat and power systems, thermally-activated cooling, solarelectric and thermal equipment, and energy storage -- collectively termeddistributed energy resources (DER). This research examines a collectionof buildings in California, the Northeast, and the southern United Statesto demonstrate the effects of regional characteristics such as the carbonintensity of central electricity grid, the climate-driven demand forspace heating and cooling, and the availability of solar insolation. Theresults illustrate that the magnitude of a realistic carbon tax ($100/tC)is too small to incent significant carbon-reducing effects oneconomically optimal DER adoption. In large part, this is because costreduction and carbon reduction objectives are roughly aligned, even inthe absence of a carbon tax.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue May 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Tue May 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • No abstract prepared.
  • The deployment of carbon capture and sequestration (CC&S) technologies is greatly affected by the marginal cost of controlling carbon emissions (also the value of carbon, when emissions permits are traded). Emissions limits that are more stringent in the near term imply higher near-term carbon values and therefore encourage the local development and deployment of CC&S technologies. In addition, trade in emissions obligations lowers the cost of meeting any regional or global emissions limit and so affects the rate of penetration of CC&S technologies. We examine the effects of the availability of sequestration opportunities and emissions trading (either within select regionsmore » or globally) on the cost of emissions mitigation and compliance with different emissions reduction targets for the IPCC SRES scenarios. For each base scenario and emissions target, we examine the issues outlined above and present quantitative estimates for the impacts of trade and the availability of sequestration opportunities in meeting emissions limitation obligations.« less
  • This paper presents an analysis of the potential impacts of an international initiative designed to support and promote the development and implementation of appliances standards and labelling programs throughout the world. As part of previous research efforts, LBNL developed the Bottom Up Energy Analysis System (BUENAS), an analysis framework that estimates impact potentials of energy efficiency policies on a global scale. In this paper, we apply this framework to an initiative that would result in the successful implementation of programs focused on high priority regions and product types, thus evaluating the potential impacts of such an initiative in terms ofmore » electricity savings and carbon mitigation in 2030. In order to model the likely parameters of such a program, we limit impacts to a five year period starting in 2009, but assume that the first 5 years of a program will result in implementation of 'best practice' minimum efficiency performance standards by 2014. The 'high priority' regions considered are: Brazil, China, the European Union,India, Mexico and the United States. The products considered are: refrigerators, air conditioners, lighting (both fluorescent and incandescent), standby power (for consumer electronics) and televisions in the residential sector, and air conditioning and lighting in commercial buildings. In 2020, these regions and enduses account for about 37percent of global residential electricity and 29percent of electricity in commercial buildings. We find that 850Mt of CO2 could be saved in buildings by 2030 compared to the baseline forecast.« less
  • Current understanding of the world's climate indicates that human-induced changes are occurring and may be sufficient in magnitude to require preventative action, such as limiting atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. The main anthropogenic greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide and its largest source is combustion of fossil fuels for power generation. Many different technologies can be used for reducing emissions, as well as increasing the removal of CO{sub 2} from the atmosphere through enhancement of natural sinks, such as by forestry. Some of these options are available today and could be implemented at relatively little overall cost. For example, improving energymore » efficiency and switching from high carbon fuels to low carbon fuels, if suitable supplies are available. These can achieve significant reductions in CO{sub 2} emissions. Introduction of renewable sources of energy or nuclear power to displace fossil fuels would achieve deep reductions in emissions if applied widely. However, to avoid disruptive changes, it will also be necessary to find ways of continuing to use fossil fuels but with much less emissions. Capture and storage of CO{sub 2} is a technology which could deliver deep reductions in emissions from fossil fuels. In this paper, methods of removing CO{sub 2} from the flue gas streams of coal and gas-fired power plants are examined, considering both plant as built today as well as possible future variants. Methods of CO{sub 2} storage are also discussed. The results on capture and storage of CO{sub 2} are put into perspective by comparison with studies of the large-scale application of forestry for sequestering atmospheric CO{sub 2}, and also large-scale use of renewable energy sources, in this case growth and harvesting of woody biomass for power generation. Each of these options has different characteristics, providing a range of choices of ways of tackling climate change.« less
  • A simplified model of global, long-term energy use is described and used to make a `top-level` comparison of two generic approaches for mitigating atmospheric carbon emissions: (a) those based on increased energy efficiency; and (b) those based on increased use of reduced- or non-carbon fuels. As approximate as is the model, first-order estimates of and trade offs between increasing non-carbon generation capacities (e.g., supply-side solutions) versus energy-use efficiency (e.g., demand-side solutions) to stem atmospheric carbon accumulations can be useful in guiding more elaborate models. At the level of this analysis, both the costs of abatement and the costs of damagemore » can be large, with the formation of benefit-to-cost ratios as a means of assessment being limited by uncertainties associated with relating given climatic responses to greenhouse warming to aggregate damage cost, as well as uncertainties associated with procedures used for multi-generation discounting of both abatement and damage costs. In view of uncertainties associated with both supply-side and demand-side approaches, as well as the estimation of greenhouse-warming responses per se, a combination of solutions seems prudent. Key findings are: (a) the relative insensitivity of the benefit-to-cost ratio adopted in this study to supply-side versus demand-side approaches to abating atmospheric carbon-dioxide emissions; (b) the extreme sensitivity of damage costs, abatement costs, and the related benefit-to-cost ratios to the combination of discounting procedure and the (time) concavity of the function used to relate global temperature rise to damage costs; and (c) no matter the discounting procedure and/or functional relationship between average temperature rise and a damage cost, a goal of increased per-capita gross world product at minimum damage suggests action now rather than delay.« less