Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Main Article Content

Nisal Herathcorresponding author

Abstract

Typically, the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) has been used to compare different electricity generation technologies. As LCOE does not account for intermittency and reliability, the updated net benefits methodology has been used. For various electricity generation technologies, with the use of the updated net benefits methodology, the net benefits of avoided emissions benefits, avoided energy cost benefits, avoided capacity cost benefits, energy costs, capacity costs and other costs at a per MW per year basis have been calculated. The results showed that nuclear generation had the highest net benefits in all of the scenarios considered. The net benefits of solar and wind generation increase when high coal and natural gas fuel price and with technological improvement which would increase the capacity factor and decrease the capital costs. Renewable and nuclear generation sources should play a significant role in the future electricity generation mix.

Keywords
net benefits, energy policy, solar, wind, nuclear

Article Details

How to Cite
Herath, N. (2021). Evaluating net benefits of electricity generating technologies. Resources and Environmental Economics, 3(1), 218-228. https://doi.org/10.25082/REE.2021.01.001

References

Energy Information Agency. Monthly Energy Review August 2019. Energy Information Agency, USA, 2019.

Jean J, Borrelli DC and Wu T. Mapping the economics of US coal power and the rise of renewables. An MIT Energy Initiative Working Paper, 2016.

British Petroleum. British Petroleum Energy Outlook 2017. BP Publishers: London, 2017.

Taghizadeh-Hesary F, Yoshino N and Inagaki Y. Empirical analysis of factors influencing the price of solar modules. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 2019, 13(1): 77-97. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-05-2018-0005

LAZARD. LAZARD’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis Version 12.0, 2018. https://www.lazard.com/media/450784/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-120-vfinal.pdf

Joskow PL. Comparing the costs of intermittent and dispatchable electricity generating technologies. American Economic Review, 2011, 101(3): 238-241. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.3.238

Frank CR. The net benefits of low and no-carbon electricity technologies. The Brookings Institution, Working Paper, 2014: 73.

Energy Information Agency. Capital Cost Estimates for Utility Scale Electricity Generating Plants. Energy Information Agency, USA, 2010.

Energy Information Agency. Capital Cost Estimates for Utility Scale Electricity Generating Plants. Energy Information Agency, USA, 2013.

Energy Information Agency. Capital Cost Estimates for Utility Scale Electricity Generating Plants. Energy Information Agency, USA, 2016.

Lovins A. An initial critique of Dr. Charles R. Frank, Jr.’s working paper “The Net Benefits of Low and No-Carbon Electricity Technologies” summarized in the Economist as “Free exchange: Sun, Wind and Drain”, 2014.

Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon USG Technical support document: - technical update of the social cost of carbon for regulatory impact analysis - under executive order 12866 -. Washington. DC, 2016. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-12/documents/sc_co2_tsd_august_2016.pdf

Waldhoff ST, Anthoff D, Rose S, et al. The marginal damage costs of different greenhouse gases: An application of FUND. Economics Discussion Paper, 2011: 43. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1974111

Henry III DD, Muller NZ and Mendelsohn RO. The social cost of trading: Measuring the increased damages from sulfur dioxide trading in the United States. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2011, 30(3): 598-612. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20584

George FC, Alvarez R and Campbell G. Life-cycle emissions of natural gas and coal in the power sector. Working document of the NPC North American resource development study by the Life-cycle analysis team of the carbon and other end-use emissions subgroup, National Petroleum Council (NPC), 2011.

Jaramillo P, Griffin WM and Matthews HS. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation. Environmental science & technology, 2007, 41(17): 6290-6296. https://doi.org/10.1021/es063031o

Augustine C, Beiter P, Cole W, et al. 2018 Annual Technology Baseline ATB Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies-Interim Data Without Geothermal Updates (No. 89). National Renewable Energy Laboratory-Data (NREL-DATA), Golden, CO (United States); National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2018.

Marcantonini C and Ellerman AD. The cost of abating CO2 emissions by renewable energy incentives in Germany. In 2013 10th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), 2013: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2013.6607312

Van den Bergh K, Delarue E and D’haeseleer W. The impact of renewable injections on cycling of conventional power plants. In 2013 10th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), 2013: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2013.6607322

Hirth L, Ueckerdt F and Edenhofer O. Integration costs revisited-An economic framework for wind and solar variability. Renewable Energy, 2015, 74: 925-939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.08.065

Gowrisankaran G, Reynolds SS and Samano M. Intermittency and the value of renewable energy. Journal of Political Economy, 2016, 124(4): 1187-1234. https://doi.org/10.1086/686733