IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v154y2015icp794-804.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing “gas transition” pathways to low carbon electricity – An Australian case study

Author

Listed:
  • Riesz, Jenny
  • Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat
  • MacGill, Iain

Abstract

Future generation portfolios including varying quantities of gas-fired and renewable generation were compared on the basis of expected costs, cost risk and greenhouse gas emissions, with a view to understanding the merits and disadvantages of gas and renewable technologies. A Monte-Carlo based generation portfolio modelling tool was applied to take into account the effects of highly uncertain future gas prices, carbon pricing policy and electricity demand. Results suggest that portfolios sourcing significant quantities of energy from gas-fired generation in 2030 and 2050 are likely to be significantly higher cost and significantly higher risk than the other alternatives considered. High gas portfolios also do not achieve the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions levels that appear required to avoid dangerous global warming. For example, portfolios that source 95% of energy from gas-fired generation in 2050 experience expected generation costs that are $65/MWh (40%) higher than portfolios that source only 20% of energy from gas-fired generation. These high gas portfolios also exhibit a cost risk (standard deviation in cost) that is three times higher. The lowest cost portfolios in 2050 source less than 20% of energy from gas with the remaining energy sourced from renewables. Even in the absence of a carbon price, the lowest cost portfolio in 2050 sources only 30% of energy from gas-fired generation, with the remaining 70% of energy being sourced from renewable technologies. Results suggest the optimal strategy for minimising costs, minimising cost risk and reducing GHG emission levels in future electricity industries may involve minimising energy sourced from gas, and increasing renewable generation. In the Australian case study considered, the modelling suggests it is appropriate to target renewable energy penetrations approaching 60% of energy by 2030 and 80–100% by 2050. In the lowest cost and lowest risk portfolios, firm capacity is provided primarily by the transition of existing coal-fired plant into a peaking role, and later by further investment in peaking open cycle gas turbine plant. These results are found to be robust to a wide range of assumptions around future carbon prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Riesz, Jenny & Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain, 2015. "Assessing “gas transition” pathways to low carbon electricity – An Australian case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 794-804.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:154:y:2015:i:c:p:794-804
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.05.071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261915007047
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.05.071?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kelly, Scott & Pollitt, Michael, 2010. "An assessment of the present and future opportunities for combined heat and power with district heating (CHP-DH) in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6936-6945, November.
    2. Garnaut,Ross, 2011. "The Garnaut Review 2011," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107691681.
    3. Losekann, Luciano & Marrero, Gustavo A. & Ramos-Real, Francisco J. & de Almeida, Edmar Luiz Fagundes, 2013. "Efficient power generating portfolio in Brazil: Conciliating cost, emissions and risk," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 301-314.
    4. Arent, Doug & Pless, Jacquelyn & Mai, Trieu & Wiser, Ryan & Hand, Maureen & Baldwin, Sam & Heath, Garvin & Macknick, Jordan & Bazilian, Morgan & Schlosser, Adam & Denholm, Paul, 2014. "Implications of high renewable electricity penetration in the U.S. for water use, greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, and materials supply," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 368-377.
    5. Molyneaux, Lynette & Froome, Craig & Wagner, Liam & Foster, John, 2013. "Australian power: Can renewable technologies change the dominant industry view?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 215-221.
    6. Muñoz, José Ignacio & Sánchez de la Nieta, Agustín A. & Contreras, Javier & Bernal-Agustín, José L., 2009. "Optimal investment portfolio in renewable energy: The Spanish case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5273-5284, December.
    7. Lynette Molyneaux & Craig Froome & Liam Wagner & John Foster, 2012. "Australian Power: Can renewable technologies change the dominant industry view?," Energy Economics and Management Group Working Papers 13-2012, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    8. Huang, Yun-Hsun & Wu, Jung-Hua, 2008. "A portfolio risk analysis on electricity supply planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 627-641, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cole, Wesley & Antonysamy, Adithya & Brown, Patrick & Sergi, Brian & Mai, Trieu & Denholm, Paul, 2023. "How much might it cost to decarbonize the power sector? It depends on the metric," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    2. Nunes, Juliana Barbosa & Mahmoudi, Nadali & Saha, Tapan Kumar & Chattopadhyay, Debabrata, 2018. "A stochastic integrated planning of electricity and natural gas networks for Queensland, Australia considering high renewable penetration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 539-553.
    3. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & Riesz, Jenny & MacGill, Iain, 2017. "Operational flexibility of future generation portfolios with high renewables," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 32-41.
    4. Duenas, Pablo & Ramos, Andres & Tapia-Ahumada, Karen & Olmos, Luis & Rivier, Michel & Pérez-Arriaga, Jose-Ignacio, 2018. "Security of supply in a carbon-free electric power system: The case of Iceland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 443-454.
    5. Riesz, Jenny & Elliston, Ben, 2016. "Research and deployment priorities for renewable technologies: Quantifying the importance of various renewable technologies for low cost, high renewable electricity systems in an Australian case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 298-308.
    6. Riesz, Jenny & Sotiriadis, Claire & Ambach, Daisy & Donovan, Stuart, 2016. "Quantifying the costs of a rapid transition to electric vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 287-300.
    7. Adams, T. & Mac Dowell, N., 2016. "Off-design point modelling of a 420MW CCGT power plant integrated with an amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture and compression process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 681-702.
    8. Xiaoyang Sun & Baosheng Zhang & Xu Tang & Benjamin C. McLellan & Mikael Höök, 2016. "Sustainable Energy Transitions in China: Renewable Options and Impacts on the Electricity System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & Riesz, Jenny & MacGill, Iain F., 2015. "Using renewables to hedge against future electricity industry uncertainties—An Australian case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 43-56.
    2. Gui, Emi Minghui & Diesendorf, Mark & MacGill, Iain, 2017. "Distributed energy infrastructure paradigm: Community microgrids in a new institutional economics context," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1355-1365.
    3. Forouli, Aikaterini & Gkonis, Nikolaos & Nikas, Alexandros & Siskos, Eleftherios & Doukas, Haris & Tourkolias, Christos, 2019. "Energy efficiency promotion in Greece in light of risk: Evaluating policies as portfolio assets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 818-831.
    4. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Flores, Yarela, 2018. "Planning in a changing environment: Applications of portfolio optimisation to deal with risk in the electricity sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3808-3823.
    5. Elliston, Ben & MacGill, Iain & Diesendorf, Mark, 2014. "Comparing least cost scenarios for 100% renewable electricity with low emission fossil fuel scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 196-204.
    6. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2013. "Assessing the value of wind generation in future carbon constrained electricity industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 400-412.
    7. Gohdes, Nicholas & Simshauser, Paul & Wilson, Clevo, 2022. "Renewable entry costs, project finance and the role of revenue quality in Australia's National Electricity Market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. de-Llano Paz, Fernando & Antelo, Susana Iglesias & Calvo Silvosa, Anxo & Soares, Isabel, 2014. "The technological and environmental efficiency of the EU-27 power mix: An evaluation based on MPT," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 67-81.
    9. Burke, Kerry B., 2014. "The reliability of distributed solar in critical peak demand: A capital value assessment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 103-110.
    10. Simshauser, P. & Gilmore, J., 2020. "Is the NEM broken? Policy discontinuity and the 2017-2020 investment megacycle," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2048, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Simshauser, Paul, 2019. "Missing money, missing policy and Resource Adequacy in Australia's National Electricity Market," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-1.
    12. deLlano-Paz, Fernando & Calvo-Silvosa, Anxo & Iglesias Antelo, Susana & Soares, Isabel, 2015. "The European low-carbon mix for 2030: The role of renewable energy sources in an environmentally and socially efficient approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 49-61.
    13. Ioannou, Anastasia & Angus, Andrew & Brennan, Feargal, 2017. "Risk-based methods for sustainable energy system planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 602-615.
    14. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Negrete-Pincetic, Matías, 2018. "Portfolio applications in electricity markets review: Private investor and manager perspective trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 192-204.
    15. John Foster & Liam Wagner, 2014. "International experience with transformations in electricity markets: A Short Literature Review," Energy Economics and Management Group Working Papers 2-2014, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    16. Foster, John & Wagner, Liam & Liebman, Ariel, 2017. "Economic and investment models for future grids: Final Report Project 3," MPRA Paper 78866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Lang, Joachim & Madlener, Reinhard, 2010. "Portfolio Optimization for Power Plants: The Impact of Credit Risk Mitigation and Margining," FCN Working Papers 11/2010, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    18. deLlano-Paz, Fernando & Martínez Fernandez, Paulino & Soares, Isabel, 2016. "Addressing 2030 EU policy framework for energy and climate: Cost, risk and energy security issues," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P2), pages 1347-1360.
    19. Pinheiro Neto, Daywes & Domingues, Elder Geraldo & Coimbra, António Paulo & de Almeida, Aníbal Traça & Alves, Aylton José & Calixto, Wesley Pacheco, 2017. "Portfolio optimization of renewable energy assets: Hydro, wind, and photovoltaic energy in the regulated market in Brazil," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 238-250.
    20. Zhang, Yue-Jun & Chen, Ming-Ying, 2018. "Evaluating the dynamic performance of energy portfolios: Empirical evidence from the DEA directional distance function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 64-78.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gas; Renewable; Electricity;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:154:y:2015:i:c:p:794-804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.