1b_Kleiman_Gary.pdf

7/27/2019 1b_Kleiman_Gary.pdf

1/16

A Regional MARKAL Model

for New EnglandGary Kleiman

ORD Science ForumMay 18, 2005


2/16

Energy/Economic Modeling Rationale

There is a tremendous need for sound energy & airquality planning at the state and regional level:

Combustion is a major source of precursors to troposphericozone and particulate matter (PM)

State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for criteria pollutant controlare due in 2007/2008

A variety of state and regional actions are possible: Transportation measures such as feebates, emissions standards Renewable portfolio standards

Important to evaluate and understand implications Multi-pollutant Cross-sector interactions

Economic impacts


3/16

NE-MARKAL Modeling of Energy System

Energy System Interactions

Gasification

Renewables

H2 Generation

Coal

Coal

Imported

Domestic

Natural Gas

Electricity Generation

Industry

Industry

Buildings

Imported

Domestic

Oil

Uranium

Oil

Refining Transportation


4/16

Focus of this talk

Sources of NOx in New England, 2002


5/16

New England Transportation Demand Projection

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

index

(1999

=

1)

LDV HDV Bus Rail Aviation

Historical Projection

Sources:

Historical record: State department of transportation officials (VMT), FTA - National Transit Database,ORNL Transportation Energy Data Book

Projection: NEEP Economic Outlook 2004~2008, EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2005


6/16

Light Duty NOXProjectionsFixed Technology

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx

(indexedto

2005)

Fixed Technology


7/16

Light Duty NOXProjections

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx(indexedto

2005)

Fixed Technology Technological Evolution


8/16


0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx(indexedto

2005)


Technological Potential

How do we get closer to this?

t


9/16

an we mprove auto e c encythrough state or regional vehicle

efficiency improvement programs (i.e.feebates)?

Fee on conventional technologies, rebate on cleanertechnologies (hybrid, FCV, etc)

Revenue neutral: amounts to redistribution of capitalcosts from less efficient to more efficient vehicles

Benefits are two-fold: consumer behavior and inducedtechnological change; MARKAL addresses the second

NESCAUM is analyzing a single tier feebate for all newpassenger vehicle sold in New England beginning in2008.

Pivot point: 22.7MPG

Rate: $1000/GP100M

Example:Vehicle Type MPG Fee/RebateLarge SUV 13 ($3,290)Large 2WD Pickup 18 ($1,150)

Mid-size Family Sedan 24 $ 140Car-Based Hybrid SUV 31 $1,180Compact Sedan 33 $1,370Compact Hybrid 47 $2,280


10/16


0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx

(indexedto

2005)


Technological Potential Feebate ($1000/PG100M)


11/16


0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx

(indexedto

2005)



Feebate ($2000/PG100M)


12/16


0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

NOx

(indexedto

2005)



Feebate ($2000/PG100M) Feebate ($3000/PG100M)


13/16

Induced Technology Change

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029

mpg

reference feebate_1 feebate_3 feebate_5

small car

small truck


14/16

Regional plans to beevaluated

Smart growth tax credit to reduce VMT

Regional feebate programs Low-sulfur heating oil

Renewable Portfolio Standards Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

incentive programs


15/16

Conclusions NE-MARKAL allows for the analysis and

quantification of expected economic andenvironmental benefits of regionalprograms plus a description of thetechnology path to get there


16/16

Documents

1b_Kleiman_Gary.pdf