the challenge of implementation: the new york state 80 by 50 plan - gerald m. stokes, associate lab...

The Challenge of Implementation:

the New York State 80 by 50 Plan

Gerald M. Stokes

Associate Lab Director BNL

President NY Energy Policy Institute

The New York State 80 by 50 Plan

Recognizing the benefits of action and the risks of inaction, in August 2009 the Governor of New York signed Executive Order 24, which tasks the State to reduce GHG emissions from all sources within the state to a level 80% below the 1990 level by 2050.

It establishes a Climate Action Council that is to develop a Climate Action Plan to achieve that goal, taking into account economic and other considerations. The plan is to be drafted by September 30, 2010.

Greenhouse Gas mitigation is an active area in the states …

31 states have completed climate actions plans and planning is continuing in 4 others.

Historically in the United States environmental leadership has come from the states.

Even with a national policy, the burden of implementation will fall to the states – in particular dealing with the economic consequences – both positive and negative – will be borne at the state level.

GHG mitigation and adaptation –have to be regional

Energy demand: regional

Economic influences – jobs, taxes … : regional

Renewable Energy: Distinctly regional character

CO2 storage: Local resource

Externalities (air quality, renewable portfolio standards etc.): regional

Off-sets like terrestrial sequestration: regional

Limiting resources (like water) are regional

Impacts and adaptation: distinctly regional

Politics: always local

Some advice going forward …

View the issue of climate change holistically, not just as the problem of emissions reductions.

Recognize that, for climate policymaking, institutional limits to global sustainability are at least as important as environmental limits.

Prepare for the likelihood that social, economic, and technologic change will be more rapid and have greater direct impacts on human populations than climate change.

Recognize the limits of rational planning.

Employ the full range of analytic perspectives and decision aids from the natural and social sciences and the humanities in climate change policymaking.

Design policy instruments for real world conditions rather than try to make the world conform to a particular policy model.

Incorporate climate concerns into other more immediate issues, such as employment, defense, economic development, and public health.

Take a regional and local approach to climate policymaking and implementation.

Direct resources into identifying vulnerability and promoting resilience, especially where the impacts will be the greatest.

Use a pluralistic approach to decision making.

Most climate/carbon strategies are usually constructed using the same basic approach

Estimate population (multiple scenarios)

Estimate the GDP per capita (also scenarios)

Estimate the energy demand and other economic activity that generate GHG emissions (more scenarios)

Construct energy supplies and associated technology forecast to meet these demands (yet another scenario – usually referred to as “Business as Usual”)

Create policies and approaches that are targeted at emissions mitigation.

Leads to a complicated set of combined scenarios that can be confusing.

7

Range of Reference Case Fossil Fuel Carbon Emissions

Range of all scenarios in the database

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080

Range of all scenarios in the database

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

Glo

ba

l C

O2

Em

iss

ion

s (G

tC)

Fo

ss

il &

In

du

str

y

Source: IIASA

Median SRES 2100 emission = 14.4 PgC/yOpen literature 2100 emissions ~20 PgC/y

The standard approach reflects the hazards of depending on “rational planning”

An alternative is to focus on cuts from current levels.• This is the targets and timetables approach.• Enshrined in the Berlin Mandate, this is the basis of the

Kyoto Protocol.• It supports early action as a demonstration of good faith

commitments.• Provides a learning framework for subsequent actions.

This focus on near term change does not allow for the long term planning for energy infrastructure and can hide the legitimate demands for future energy services.

Scenarios play an important role in planning climate mitigation strategies

A scenario is a story that helps you think about the future – it is not a prediction.

For climate and carbon the required changes are long term

Goals are set for times well beyond any credible predictions.

The New York approach has two parts …

A visioning activity that frames the scale and scope of the challenge of meeting the 80 by 50 goal.

• Answers the question – is this a plausible goal?• Illustrates the magnitude of changes that are likely required.• Not a proposal – but a context.

The mandated Council activity that provides the roadmap (the

“Plan”) for meeting the goal.• Specific actions developed by sector specific working groups,• And a integration team that looks at the critical interactions among

the sectors.• Supported by a more conventional near term “abatement cost

curve” appraoch.

The “visioning” approach

We postulate a future distribution of CO2 among the key economic sectors

We identify technology strategies that can meet the proposed emissions allocation (scenarios)

This is a back-casting scenario which supports a “future-by-choice” approach as guide to policy.

This approach avoids the compounding scenario problem.

Some basic facts

New York State CO2 emissions are primarily due to combustion

Both the current and future energy system is made up of energy sources and energy carriers

• Sources - Fossil Fuels: Coal (2.2)*, Oil (1.7)*, Natural Gas (1.0)*- Nuclear Power- Renewable: Solar, wind, geothermal, hydro,

biomass …• Carriers

- Electricity- Hydrogen

* Carbon emission per unit energy relative to NG

Different initial conditions play out in different mitigation paths

What is the NYS starting point?

Sector CO2 Emissions (MMT CO2) Notes

Current (2007) BAU (2050)

Residential 37.6 45.0 567x106 MBTU Gas154x106 MBTU Liquid

Commercial 27.2 39.1 431x106 MBTU Gas156x106 MBTU Liquid

Industrial 19.0 24.179x106 MBTU Gas21x106 MBTU Liquid80x106 MBTU Coal/Coke

Transportation 88.3 126 14.8x109 VMT HDV209.2x109 VMT LDV

Electricity 49.2 83.3271,000 GWhR-88.2; C-140;I-36.3; T-6.2

Other 28.8 43.0 SF6; NG leaks; MSW; HFC

Total 250.2 360.5

Note: 1990 emissions = 277 MMT CO2eMaking the goal 55.4 MMT CO2e

Three scenarios were developed to illustrate possible 2050 outcomes

Yellow: This scenario could be called a “conventional wisdom” scenario – efficiency and non-biomass renewables are exploited “completely”. It gets us most of the way to the 2050 goal. It highlights the importance of the transport sector in meeting the goal.

Deep Blue: This scenario approached transport using hydrogen as an energy carrier, drives the building sectors to complete electrification, and increases the electrification of the industrial sector.

Ultraviolet: Essentially the same scenario as Deep Blue except that the energy carrier of choice is electricity rather than hydrogen.

Working through the CO2 producing sectors for the Yellow scenario beginning with buildings

Sector Yellow scenario Baseline Notes

Residential 7.5 37.6/45.0 20% Efficiency80% NG to electricity70% Liquids to electricity10% of electricity demand increase met through local solar

Commercial 4.5 27.2/39.1 30% NG efficiency &20% Liquid efficiency80% of balance to electricity10% of electricity demand increase met through local solar

Industrial 19.0/24.1

Transport 88.3/126

Electricity 49.2/83.3

Other 28.8/43.0

Total 12.0 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

161, 900 GWh moved to the grid

The industrial sector is a critical component of the economy


Residential 7.5 37.6/45.0

Commercial 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 14.4 19.0/24.1

NG – 49% efficiency 50% to electricityLiquids - 20% efficiencyBalance to the gridSolids – all to NG

Transport 88.3/126


Other 28.8/43.0

Total 26.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

Note: 7327 GWh to electricity-> The change in the industrial base will facilitate the fuel switching

The transport sector represents a great challenge





Transport 51 88.3/126

HDV – 50% to intermodal 6.9 mpg for balanceLDV – 10% conservation30% CV – 37mpg30% HEV – 50 mpg40% PHEV – 95% electricAviation – 30% efficiency in 90% of fleet


Other 28.8/43.0

Total 77.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

21,500 GWh to electricityAviation is 12.4 MMT of total

We have been pushing things to the electric sector -






Electricity 24 49.2/83.3All from CCS capture losses

Other 28.8/43.0

Total 101.7 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

Efficiency - 25% in buildings; 10% in Industrial ; add 182,000 GWh from switching + 4% T&D losses (50% improvement)= 408, 000 GWh demand

And how would we meet that demand?

Source Current GWh New GWh

Wind 873 42,000

Nuclear 42,450 0

Hydro 25,500 10,300

Solar * 0 100,000

IGCC w/ CCS 0 140,000

NGCC w/ CCS 0 50,000

* Over and above the local solar

As the other sectors become more carbon efficient “other” becomes more important






Electricity 24 49.2/83.3

Other 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

Well shy of the goal – but a greater than 65% reduction from BAU

and 50% from current emissions

Yellow Scenario – bottom line

Does not meet goal

Eliminates all current fossil combustion for electricity

Does not use biofuels/biomass or nuclear

Calls for massive deployment of wind and solar

Places large (doubles) demand on the grid

Deep Blue is our first goal reaching scenario

Sector Deep Blue Yellow Baseline Notes

Residential 0 7.5 37.6/45.0 108, 000GWh to GridCommercial 0 4.5 27.2/39.1




Other 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 12.3 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

Residential – 20% efficiency50 % to electricity (30% met with local solar); 50 % to biofuels for both gas and liquidCommercial – 30% efficiency All NG and liquids to electricity w/ 30% met by local solar

Deep Blue pushes more industrial energy demand to the grid


Residential 0 7.5 37.6/45.0

Commercial 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1 All NG and liquids to the grid



Other 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 25.0 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

All NG and liquids to the gridSolid fuel to NG the same as Yellow Scenario

Asphalt and Petrochem ~70% of total emissions15,150 GWh to the grid

But Deep Blue uses hydrogen and biofuels in the transport sector rather than electricity



Commercial 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1 All NG and liquids to the grid

Transport 20.1 51 88.3/126


Other 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 45.1 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

HDV – 45% biofuel 55% dieselAviation 45% of total from BioJet

LDV – 100% Hydrogen vehicles @ 65 mpg equivalentHydrogen prouction 50,000 GWh equivalent

0 GWh to the grid

Deep Blue uses hydrogen and biofuels in the transport sector



Commercial 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1

Transport 20.1 51 88.3/126

Electricity 13 24 49.2/83.3

Other 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 58.1 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

Total electric demand is 410,000 GWh

And satisfying that demand moves from coal to NG and nuclear


Wind 873 42,000

Nuclear 42,450 25,000

Hydro 25,500 10,300

Solar * 0 100,000

IGCC w/ CCS 0 0

NGCC w/ CCS 0 170,000

* Over and above the local solar assumed in buildings sector

The Deep Blue scenario essentially meets the goal

Commercial and Residential structures have been taken to zero emissions – efficiency, electrification, local generation and biofuel

Industrial production is further electrified

The transport sector is hydrogen for light duty vehicles and biofuel is a major component of heavy duty vehicle fuels

Modest nuclear has been added and coal has been eliminated in favor of natural gas

The Ultraviolet Scenario attacks transport through electrification

Sector Ultraviolet Deep Blue Yellow Baseline Notes

Residential 0 0 7.5 37.6/45.0

Commercial 0 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1

Transport 20.1 20.1 51 88.3/126


Other 12.3 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 45.1 58.1 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

The HDV an Aviation sectors are the same as Deep BlueLDV is 100% PHEV – 95% electric with balance met with ethanol

38, 500 GWh to the grid

And the electricity sector reduces emissions with a move to nuclear


Residential 0 0 7.5 37.6/45.0

Commercial 0 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1

Transport 20.1 20.1 51 88.3/126

Electricity 10 13 24 49.2/83.3

Other 12.3 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 55.1 58.1 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

And satisfying that demand moves from coal to NG and nuclear


Wind 873 42,000

Nuclear 42,450 118,000

Hydro 25,500 10,300

Solar * 0 100,000

IGCC w/ CCS 0 70,000

NGCC w/ CCS 0 0

* Over and above the local solar

The Ultraviolet Scenario meets the goal

Light Duty transportation has moved to plug-in hybrids with liquid fuel needs met by ethanol

Nuclear is a major player in the electricity sector

Reflecting on the results


Residential 0 0 7.5 37.6/45.0

Commercial 0 0 4.5 27.2/39.1

Industrial 12.7 12.7 14.1 19.0/24.1

Transport 20.1 20.1 51 88.3/126

Electricity 10 13 24 49.2/83.3

Other 12.3 12.3 12.3 28.8/43.0

Total 55.1 58.1 113.4 250.2/360.5 Goal – 55.4

• Transport and Industrial (most of other) emissions get the largest share• CCS and nuclear are key to reductions in the electric sector• While presented as zero existing structures will be a major challenge•We have assumed biofuels are carbon neutral

Some further observations The 80x50 goal is ambitious, and achieving it will require investments in new

energy systems and infrastructure that have very low or no net carbon emissions. Patterns of energy use will also need to change.

Energy efficiency is an essential, but not sufficient, strategy that can be aggressively pursued today.

A broad shift from reliance on burning fossil fuels to electricity generated from low- or no-carbon sources, or widespread use of carbon capture and sequestration, will be needed.

Transportation and buildings (residential and commercial) will have to move away from reliance on combustion of fossil fuels to alternate sources with significantly lower carbon or no carbon emissions.

Development and redevelopment based on smart growth principles, as well as the building design practices, building technologies, and construction methods can significantly reduce the energy demand for buildings, as well as transportation.

Incremental, short-term planning cannot achieve the goal. Near-term decisions – both those taken and not taken – can preclude longer-term options, such as infrastructure projects requiring long lead times. Key climate strategies must reflect this reality.

Looking ahead …

There are clearly big decisions necessary to achieve goal – many probably need to made sooner rather than later – infrastructure, fuel sources.

• The role of nuclear and CCS• The reliability and capacity of the grid• The role for biomass

The baseline scenario is for a very robust economy with a growing industrial base – not the contraction seen since 1990 - and the move to electrification, is consistent with a 21st Century economy (info, bio and nano).

All renewable energy is from within the state resources, adding a significant sector to the state economy.

• How the state cooperates with its neighbors will be important (generation, grid) is important.

• Achievement of renewable goals is a critical success factor for the strategy.

the challenge of implementation: the new york state 80 by 50 plan - gerald m. stokes, associate lab...

Documents

climate policymaking

climate actions

new york approach

climate change policymaking

regional renewable energy

regional energy demand

regional impacts

local approach