Implications and Policy Options of California's Reliance on Natural Gas PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Implications and Policy Options of California's Reliance on Natural Gas PDF full book. Access full book title Implications and Policy Options of California's Reliance on Natural Gas by Mark A. Bernstein. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Mark A. Bernstein
Publisher: Rand Corporation
ISBN: 9780833032171
Category : Science
Languages : en
Pages : 64
Get Book Here
Book Description
Assesses the benefits, risks, and implications of the increased use of natural gas to meet California's growing energy needs. The authors address supply-side solutions, such as building more capacity to receive and store gas, and demand-side solutions, such as energy efficiency and diversifying the portfolio of electricity generation with renewables and distributed generation.
Author: Mark A. Bernstein
Publisher: Rand Corporation
ISBN: 9780833032171
Category : Science
Languages : en
Pages : 64
Get Book Here
Book Description
Assesses the benefits, risks, and implications of the increased use of natural gas to meet California's growing energy needs. The authors address supply-side solutions, such as building more capacity to receive and store gas, and demand-side solutions, such as energy efficiency and diversifying the portfolio of electricity generation with renewables and distributed generation.
Author: Christopher Weare
Publisher: Public Policy Instit. of CA
ISBN: 1582130647
Category : Business & Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 140
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 14
Get Book Here
Book Description
California is at the forefront of addressing the challenges involved in redesigning its energy infrastructure to meet 2050 GHG reduction goals, but CCUS commercialization lags in California as it does elsewhere. It is unclear why this is the case given the state's forefront position in aggressive climate change policy. The intent of this paper is to examine the factors that may explain why CCUS has not advanced as rapidly as other GHG emissions mitigation technologies in California and identify ways by which CCUS commercialization may be advanced in the context of California's future energy infrastructure. CCUS has application to reduce GHG emissions from the power, industrial and transportation sectors in the state. Efficiency, use of renewable energy or nuclear generation to replace fossil fuels, use of lower or no-net-carbon feedstocks (such as biomass), and use of CCUS on fossil fuel generation are the main options, but California has fewer options for making the deep cuts in CO2 emissions within the electricity sector to meet 2050 goals. California is already the most efficient of all 50 states as measured by electricity use per capita, and, while further efficiency measures can reduce per capita consumption, increasing population is still driving electricity demand upwards. A 1976 law prevents building any new nuclear plants until a federal high-level nuclear waste repository is approved. Most all in-state electricity generation already comes from natural gas; although California does plan to eliminate electricity imports from out-of-state coal-fired generation. Thus, the two options with greatest potential to reduce in-state power sector CO2 emissions are replacing fossil with renewable generation or employing CCUS on natural gas power plants. Although some scenarios call on California to transition its electricity sector to 100 percent renewables, it is unclear how practical this approach is given the intermittency of renewable generation, mismatches between peak generation times and demand times, and the rate of progress in developing technologies for large-scale power storage. Vehicles must be electrified or move to biofuels or zero-carbon fuels in order to decarbonize the transportation sector. These options transfer the carbon footprint of transportation to other sectors: the power sector in the case of electric vehicles and the industrial and agricultural sectors in the case of biofuels or zero-carbon fuels. Thus, the underlying presumption to achieve overall carbon reductions is that the electricity used by vehicles does not raise the carbon emissions of the power sector: biofuel feedstock growth, harvest, and processing uses low carbon energy or production of fuels from fossil feedstocks employs CCUS. This results in future transportation sector energy derived solely from renewables, biomass, or fossil fuel point sources utilizing CCUS. In the industrial sector, the largest contributors to GHG emissions are transportation fuel refineries and cement plants. Emissions from refineries come from on-site power generation and hydrogen plants; while fuel mixes can be changed to reduce the GHG emissions from processing and renewable sources can be used to generate power, total decarbonization requires use of CCUS. Similarly, for cement plants, power generation may use carbon-free feedstocks instead of fossil fuels, but CO2 emissions associated with the manufacture of cement products must be dealt with through CCUS. Of course, another option for these facilities is the purchase of offsets to create a zero-emissions plant.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Computable general equilibrium models
Languages : en
Pages : 130
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Climatic changes
Languages : en
Pages : 26
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Stanford University. School of Law
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Electric power
Languages : en
Pages : 478
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: California Public Utilities Commission
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Air quality
Languages : en
Pages : 70
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: California Energy Commission
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Electric power
Languages : en
Pages : 118
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Kenneth C. Johnson
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
Abstract- California's Cap-and-Trade system cannot achieve the “maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions” required by statute because the emissions reduction target (the cap) is itself predetermined by statute.- Cap-and-Trade disincentivizes complementary and independent carbon-reduction actions in capped sectors by nullifying their environmental benefits (the “waterbed effect”).- In contrast to Cap-and-Trade, an effective regulatory policy would empower individuals, businesses, communities, and municipalities to influence the scale and pace of decarbonization through their collective actions and investment choices.California's landmark AB 32 legislation, enacted in 2006, tasked the California Air Resources Board (CARB) with (1) ensuring that statewide greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 would not exceed the 1990 level, and (2) achieving the “maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions”. CARB adopted a caps-and-standards regulatory framework, which interpreted the statutory emissions limit in 2020 as a predetermined “target”, thus rendering the maximum-reduction mandate ineffectual. In its May, 2022 draft Scoping Plan, CARB proposed extending the same framework to implement California's new legislative directive (SB 32) requiring a reduction of statewide emissions by “at least 40 percent” below the 1990 level “no later than” 2030. The plan continues CARB's reliance on Cap-and-Trade, which again establishes the statutory minimum as a “target” and disincentivizes further emissions reductions beyond the target - any such action would simply free up surplus allowances for other emitters to use (the “waterbed effect”). To put California on track toward decarbonization at the scale and pace required for global climate stabilization, the legislature should resolve interpretative ambiguities and contradictions in its statutes and institute a regulatory policy paradigm that gives meaning and effect to the mandate requiring “maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective” emissions reductions.
Author: California
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Fishery law and legislation
Languages : en
Pages : 158
Get Book Here
Book Description
