Analysis of Strategies
for Reducing Multiple Emissions from Electric Power Plants with Advanced
Technology Scenarios
Highlights
This analysis responds to a request by Senators James M. Jeffords
(I-VT) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT) to analyze the potential impacts of
limits on four emissions from electricity generators, sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon dioxide (CO2), and mercury
(Hg). Using 2002 as a start date for emissions reductions, the request specifies
that by 2007 NOx emissions from electricity generators are assumed
to be reduced to 75 percent below 1997 levels, SO2 emissions to
75 percent below the full implementation of the Phase II requirements under
Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90), Hg emissions to
90 percent below 1999 levels, and CO2 emissions to 1990 levels.
It is assumed that these emissions limits are applied to all electricity generators,
excluding cogenerators, which produce both electricity and useful thermal
output.
The impacts of these assumed limits are analyzed against four
different cases with varying levels of energy demand: the reference case from
the Annual Energy Outlook 2001 (AEO2001), published in December
2000; an advanced technology case combining the high technology assumptions
for end-use demand, supply, and generating technologies from AEO2001;
and cases incorporating the moderate and advanced policies from Scenarios
for a Clean Energy Future (CEF), a November 2000 publication from
an interlaboratory working group. The policies in the CEF analysis
included fiscal incentives, regulations, and increased research and development
funding for advanced technologies. The advanced CEF case also included
a domestic CO2 trading system for all energy markets that was assumed
to equilibrate at a permit value of $50 per metric ton carbon equivalent,
which would be announced in 2002 and implemented in 2005.
The cases include all energy laws and regulations in effect
as of July 1, 2000, including the NOx and SO2 regulations
established in the CAAA90, plus the new appliance efficiency standards announced
in January 2001 as modified by the current Administration. The analysis was
conducted using the Energy Information Administrations (EIA) National
Energy Modeling System. Key results are summarized below.
Cases without Emissions Limits
- The AEO2001 reference case includes continuing development of
energy-consuming and producing technologies, consistent with historic trends
in research and development funding. The advanced technology assumptions
in AEO2001 are based on more optimistic technology development throughout
the energy system, consistent with more aggressive research and development
programs. The costs to achieve these technology improvements are not quantified
because there is no analysis showing that funding levels for research and
development can be tied directly to the successful development of new technologies.
- The moderate and advanced cases in CEF included a number of policies
to encourage the development and adoption of technologies that are more
energy-efficient and with lower emissions. However, the success of these
programs was based on assumed changes in consumer behavior that are not
consistent with historic behavior patterns, result from research and development
funding increases that have not occurred, and voluntary and information
programs for which there is no analytical basis for evaluating the impacts.
Also, some of the assumed CEF policies required legislative or regulatory
actions that may not be enacted at all or may be enacted at later dates
than assumed in CEF.
- Future technology development cannot be known with certainty, and even
the technology improvements assumed in the reference case are likely, but
not certain. The more rapid technology development assumed in the advanced
technology case and in the CEF cases is more uncertain and represents
a higher level of risk for the ultimate success and timing of the technology
improvement. Furthermore, the simultaneous success of a wide range of technology
development projects is highly unlikely. Because the reference case is based
on historical levels of funding and technology development, the technology
trends assumed in the reference case are considered to be the most likely
trends. However, of the cases considered in this study, this is the case
for which it is most costly to reduce emissions.
- Relative to the reference case, the advanced technology case and the
cases with the CEF policies all reduce projected energy demand, energy
prices, and related emissions. Total energy demand in 2020 is projected
to be similar in the advanced technology case and the case incorporating
the CEF moderate policies, with the lowest demand in the case incorporating
the CEF advanced policies. Because the advanced technology case also
includes more rapid technology development for fossil fuel supply, that
case has the lowest projected energy prices.
- As a result of lower energy prices and demand, the advanced technology
and the CEF cases have lower projected energy expenditures than in
the reference case.
Cases with Emissions Limits
- In general, the emissions limits are achieved through a combination of
reductions in energy demand, shifts from coal-fired electricity generation
to existing nuclear, natural gas, and renewable generation, and additional
emissions control equipment. Within the time frame of the emissions limits,
economical technologies to capture and sequester CO2 emissions
are unlikely, although these technologies are included in the analysis.
In addition, Hg emissions control technologies are relatively new and untested
on a commercial scale. As a result, their cost and performance are highly
uncertain.
- CO2 emissions permit costs are included in the price of the
fossil fuel to electricity generators. For the other three emissions, the
permit costs are included in the electricity price if the unit is the marginal
generator. All cases assume a marketable emissions permit system with an
allocation of permits based on historical emissions.
- In 2020, the allowance prices for SO2 range from $221 to $905
per ton (1999 dollars), NOx from zero to $81 per ton, Hg
from $306 to $468 million per ton, and CO2 from $50 to $122 per
metric ton carbon equivalent. The efforts to reduce NOx, SO2,
Hg, and CO2 emissions are linked. Emissions control equipment
added to reduce NOx and SO2 also leads to lower Hg
emissions. Similarly, because reducing CO2 typically leads to
lower coal use, it also lowers NOx, SO2, and Hg emissions.
As a result, all of the allowance prices are also interrelated; and, if
the emission target for one were changed, all of the allowance prices would
likely change.
- Reducing energy demand relative to the reference case by encouraging
the development and adoption of more energy-efficient technologies or lowering
the demand for energy services makes the emissions limits less costly to
achieve. In 2020, total energy demand is reduced by between 1 and 5 percent
when the emissions limits are imposed.
- In each of the four cases, the total cumulative resource cost of generating
electricity is projected to increase by 8 to 9 percent when the emissions
limits are imposed.
- In 2020, the increase in projected electricity prices due to the emissions
limits ranges from zero to 33 percent. In the case incorporating the CEF
advanced policies, imposing the emissions limits is not expected to result
in higher electricity prices, primarily due to the $50 per ton carbon fee
already included in the case without emissions limits.
- Imposing the emissions limits on each of the four cases is projected
to raise the demand for natural gas due to increased use by electricity
generators that are subject to the emissions limits. Natural gas demand
is also projected to be higher for commercial and industrial cogeneration
in all cases except the case with the advanced CEF policies. This
case is the exception because the $50 per ton carbon fee in the case without
limits is essentially the same as the CO2 permit price that results
when the emissions limits are imposed. As a result of higher projected natural
gas demand, natural gas prices in 2020 are projected to be higher by between
11 and 20 percent in all four cases when the emissions limits are imposed.
- Because the CEF advanced policies include a $50 per ton carbon
fee and a policy to reduce particulate emissions, coal consumption is sharply
reduced in that case and electricity prices are higher relative to the reference
case, even without the emissions limits. Because of the $50 per ton carbon
fee, imposing emissions limits does not cause a significant additional reduction
in total energy demand in that case.
- Although the total energy expenditures are lower in the advanced technology
and CEF cases than in the reference case, energy expenditures are
expected to increase when the emissions limits are imposed in all cases.
- Meeting the individual emission limits for NOx, SO2,
Hg, and CO2 will all require significant effort; the CO2
and Hg limits are likely to be the most difficult to meet. While there is
some uncertainty, technologies exist that would allow electricity generators
to meet the NOx and SO2 limits without switching fuels.
However, meeting the assumed Hg limit of 4.3 tons probably would require
some fuel switching. This limit for Hg implies removing 95 percent of the
Hg in the coal used by electricity generators today. For many combinations
of plant and coal type, existing technology may not be able to achieve this
level of removal. Similarly, to meet the assumed CO2 limit, significant
switching from coal to other fuels is expected, because low-cost technologies
for capturing and sequestering CO2 are not expected to be widely
available in the time frame of this analysis.
- The assumed emissions limits are expected to have measurable short-term
impacts on the economy when the limits are fully imposed in 2007, with a
reduction in gross domestic product ranging from 0.4 to 0.8 percent. However,
the impact is significantly reduced even by 2010, as the economy adjusts
to higher energy prices. In all cases except the reference case, the macroeconomic
impacts of the emissions limits are essentially eliminated by 2020.

If you would like to receive any information relating to our
reports via e-mail, click here,
select "forecasts"
and the specific list(s) you would like to join, and subscribe by entering
your e-mail address.
Contact Us
URL: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/eppats/index.html