The climate and air-quality benefits of wind and solar power in the United States

Nature Energy

Volumn 2, Issue 9, 2017, Pages

  Millstein, Dev ^a   Wiser, Ryan ^a   Bolinger, Mark ^a   Barbose, Galen ^a  

^a LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; FOSSIL FUELS; GREENHOUSE GASES; SOLAR ENERGY; WIND POWER;

CUMULATIVE BENEFITS; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; MARGINAL BENEFIT; PREMATURE MORTALITY; REGULATORY CHANGE; SOCIAL COST OF CARBON; SOLAR AND WINDS; WIND AND SOLAR POWER;

AIR QUALITY;

EID: 85029323192     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20587546     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nenergy.2017.134     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Arent, D., et al. Implications of high renewable electricity penetration in the US for water use, greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, and materials supply. Appl. Energy 123, 368-377 (2014).
2. Valentino, L., Valenzuela, V., Botterud, A., Zhou, Z., Conzelmann, G. System-wide emissions implications of increased wind power penetration. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 4200-4206 (2012).
3. Wiser, R., et al. Long-term implications of sustained wind power growth in the United States: Potential benefits and secondary impacts. Appl. Energy 179, 146-158 (2016).
4. Wiser, R., et al. The environmental and public health benefits of achieving high penetrations of solar energy in the United States. Energy 113, 472-486 (2016).
5. Barbose, G., et al. A retrospective analysis of benefits and impacts of US renewable portfolio standards. Energy Pol. 96, 645-660 (2016).
6. Buonocore, J. J., Dong, X., Spengler, J. D., Fu, J. S., Levy, J. I. Using the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model to estimate public health impacts of PM 2.5 from individual power plants. Environ. Int. 68, 200-208 (2014).
7. McCubbin, D., Sovacool, B. K. Quantifying the health and environmental benefits of wind power to natural gas. Energy Pol. 53, 429-441 (2013).
8. Rhodes, J. D., et al. A geographically resolved method to estimate levelized power plant costs with environmental externalities . Energy Pol. 102, 491-499 (2017).
9. Siler-Evans, K., Azevedo, I. L., Morgan, M. G., Apt, J. Regional variations in the health, environmental, and climate benefits of wind and solar generation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 11768-11773 (2013).
10. Cullen, J. Measuring the environmental benefits of wind-generated electricity. AEJ: Econ. Pol. 5, 107-133 (2013).
11. Denholm, P., Margolis, R. M., Milford, J. M. Quantifying avoided fuel use and emissions from solar photovoltaic generation in the western United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 226-232 (2008).
12. Kafine, D. T., McBee, B. J., Lieskovsky, J. Emissions savings from wind power generation in Texas. Energy J. 34, 155-175 (2013).
13. Brown, K. E., Henze, D. K., Milford, J. B. Accounting for climate and air quality damages in future US electricity generation scenarios. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 3065-3072 (2013).
14. Fann, N., Baker, K. R., Fulcher, C. M. Characterizing the PM 2.5-related health benefits of emission reductions for 17 industrial, area and mobile emission sectors across the US. Environ. Int. 49, 141-151 (2012).
15. Jenner, S., Lamadrid, A. J. Shale gas versus coal: Policy implications from environmental impact comparisons of shale gas, conventional gas, and coal on air, water, and land in the United States. Energy Pol. 53, 442-453 (2013).
16. Kerl, P. Y., et al. New approach for optimal electricity planning and dispatching with hourly time-scale air quality and health considerations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 10884-10889 (2015).
17. Machol, B., Rizk, S. Economic value of US fossil fuel electricity health impacts. Environ. Int. 52, 75-80 (2013).
18. Shindell, D. T. The Social Cost of Atmospheric Release (Economics Discussion Papers, 2013).
19. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use (National Academies, 2010).
20. Annual Electric Generator Report EIA-860 (Energy Information Administration, 2016).
21. US Solar Market Insight Report: 2015 Year in Review (GTM Research and Solar Energy Industries Association, 2016).
22. US Solar Market Trends 2013 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014).
23. AVoided Emissions and Generation Tool (AVERT)User Manual: Version 1.2 (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014).
24. Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Data: Average Annual Emissions, Criteria pollutants National Tier 1 for 1970-2016 (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2016).
25. Cai, H., Wang, M., Elgowainy, A., Han, J. Updated Greenhouse Gas and Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Factors and their Probability Distribution Functions for Electricity Generating Units (Argonne National Laboratory, 2012).
26. Cai, H., Wang, M., Elgowainy, A., Han, J. Updated Greenhouse Gas and Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Factors of the US Electric Generating Units in 2010 (Argonne National Laboratory, 2013).
27. Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide (National Academies, 2017).
28. Penn, S. L., et al. Estimating state-specific contributions to PM2. 5-A nd O3-related health burden from residential combustion and electricity generating unit emissions in the United States. Environ. Health Perspect. 125, 324-332 (2017).
29. Buonocore, J. J., et al. Health and climate benefits of difierent energy-eficiency and renewable energy choices. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 100-105 (2016).
30. Borenstein, S. The private and public economics of renewable electricity generation. J. Econ. Perspect. 26, 67-92 (2012).
31. Edenhofer, O., et al. On the economics of renewable energy sources. Energy Econ. 40, S12-S23 (2013).
32. IPCC Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O., et al.) Ch. 3 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
33. Fell, H., Linn, J. Renewable electricity policies, heterogeneity, and cost efiectiveness. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 66, 688-707 (2013).
34. Fischer, C., Newell, R. G. Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 55, 142-162 (2008).
35. Kalkuhl, M., Edenhofer, O., Lessmann, K. Renewable energy subsidies: Second-best policy or fatal aberration for mitigation Resour. Energy Econ. 35, 217-234 (2013).
36. Lew, D., et al. TheWesternWind and Solar Integration Study Phase 2 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2013).
37. Fisher, J., DeYoung, R. K., Santen, N. R. Assessing the emission benefits of renewable energy and energy eficiency using EPA's avoided emissions and generation tool (AVERT). In 2015 Int. Emission Inventory Conf. Air Quality Challenges Tackling Changing Face of Emissions (EPA, 2015).
38. Air Emissions Displacement by Energy Eficiency and Renewable Energy: A Survey of Data, Methods, and Results (Synapse Energy Economics, 2015).
39. Levy, J. I., et al. Carbon reductions and health co-benefits from US residential energy eficiency measures. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 034017 (2016).
40. Ohler, A. M., Ta, C. L. Modeling impacts from EPA's clean power plan and building block 3 for renewable energy. Electr. J. 28, 72-82 (2015).
41. Power Plant Operations Report Report no. EIA-923 (Energy Information Administration, 2016).
42. AWEA Market Database Pro (AmericanWind Energy Association, 2016).
43. The Clean Air Benefits ofWind Energy (AmericanWind Energy Association, 2014).
44. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Electronic Quarterly Reports (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2016).
45. Wiser, R., Bolinger, M. 2015Wind Technologies Market Report (US Department of Energy, 2016).
46. Bolinger, M., Seel, J. Utility-Scale Solar 2015: An Empirical Analysis of Project Cost, Performance, and Pricing Trends in the United States (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2016).
47. Dobos, A. P. PVWatts Version 5 Manual (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2014); https://doi.org/10.2172/1158421
48. Technical Notes to the Electric Power Monthly (Energy Information Administration, 2015).
49. Heo, J., Adams, P. J., Gao, H. O. Public health costs of primary PM2.5 and inorganic PM2.5 precursor emissions in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 6061-6070 (2016).
50. Heo, J., Adams, P. J., Gao, H. O. Reduced-form modeling of public health impacts of inorganic PM 2.5 and precursor emissions. Atmos. Environ. 137, 80-89 (2016).
51. Muller, N. Z. Boosting GDP growth by accounting for the environment. Science 345, 873-874 (2014).
52. Muller, N. Z., Mendelsohn, R., Nordhaus, W. Environmental accounting for pollution in the United States economy. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 1649-1675 (2011).
53. Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Clean Power Plan Final Rule (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2015).
54. User's Manual for the Co-Benefits Risk Assessment (COBRA)Screening Model Version: 2.61 (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014).
55. Krewski, D., et al. Extended follow-up and spatial analysis of the American Cancer Society study linking particulate air pollution and mortality. Res. Rep. Health Efi. Inst. 140, 5-114 (2009).
56. Lepeule, J., Laden, F., Dockery, D., Schwartz, J. Chronic exposure to fine particles and mortality: An extended follow-up of the Harvard Six Cities study from 1974 to 2009. Environ. Health Perspect. 120, 965-970 (2012).
57. Roman, H. A., et al. Expert judgment assessment of the mortality impact of changes in ambient fine particulate matter in the US. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 2268-2274 (2008).
58. Driscoll, C. T., et al. US power plant carbon standards and clean air and health co-benefits. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 535-540 (2015).
59. ENVIRON CAMx User's Guide Version 5.41 (Environ International Corporation, 2012).
60. Byun, D., Schere, K. L. Review of the governing equations, computational algorithms, and other components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system. App. Mech. Rev. 59, 51-77 (2006).
61. Ching, J., Byun, D. Science Algorithms of the EPA Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ)Modeling System: Introduction to the Models-3 framework and the Community Multiscale Air Quality model (CMAQ) (US Environmental Protection Agency, 1999).
62. Latimer, D. A. Particulate Matter Source-Receptor Relationships Between All Point and Area Sources in the United States and PSD Class I Area Receptors (US Environmental Protection Agency, 1996).
63. Tol, R. S. The social cost of carbon: Trends, outliers and catastrophes. Econ. E-J. 2, 2008-2025 (2008).
64. Tol, R. S. The social cost of carbon. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 3, 419-443 (2011).
65. Tol, R. S. Targets for global climate policy: An overview. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 37, 911-928 (2013).
66. Nordhaus, W. D. Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1518-1523 (2017).
67. Gillingham, K., et al. Modeling Uncertainty in Climate Change: A Multi-Model Comparison (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2015).
68. Nordhaus, W. Estimates of the social cost of carbon: Concepts and results from the DiCE-2013R model and alternative approaches. J. Assoc. Environ. Res. Econ. 1, 273-312 (2014).
69. Ackerman, F., Stanton, E. A., Hope, C., Alberth, S. Did the Stern Review underestimate US and global climate damages Energy Pol. 37, 2717-2721 (2009).
70. Van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Botzen, W. J.W. A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 253-258 (2014).
71. Weitzman, M. L. Tail-hedge discounting and the social cost of carbon. J. Econ. Lit. 51, 873-882 (2013).
72. Havranek, T., Irsova, Z., Janda, K., Zilberman, D. Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon. Energy Econ. 51, 394-406 (2015).