IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hae/wpaper/2024-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal transmission expansion minimally reduces decarbonization costs of U.S. electricity

Author

Listed:
  • Rangrang Zheng

    (University of Hawaii)

  • Greg Schivley

    (Princeton University)

  • Patricia Hidalgo-Gonzalez

    (University of California San Diego)

  • Matthias Fripp

    (Environmental Defense Fund)

  • Michael J. Roberts

    (University of Hawaii)

Abstract

Solar and wind power are cost-competitive with fossil fuels, yet their intermittent nature presents challenges. Significant temporal and geographic differences in land, wind, and solar resources suggest that long-distance transmission could be particularly beneficial. Using a detailed, open source model, we analyze optimal transmission expansion jointly with storage, generation, and hourly operations across the three primary interconnects in the United States. Transmission expansion offers far more benefits in a high-renewable system than in a system with mostly conventional generation. Yet while an optimal nationwide plan would have more than triple current interregional transmission, transmission decreases the cost of a 100% clean system by only 4% compared to a plan that relies solely on current transmission. Expanding capacity only within existing interconnects can achieve most of these savings. Adjustments to energy storage and generation mix can leverage the current interregional transmission infrastructure to build a clean power system at a reasonable cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Rangrang Zheng & Greg Schivley & Patricia Hidalgo-Gonzalez & Matthias Fripp & Michael J. Roberts, 2024. "Optimal transmission expansion minimally reduces decarbonization costs of U.S. electricity," Working Papers 2024-2, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    • Handle: RePEc:hae:wpaper:2024-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://uhero.hawaii.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/UHEROwp2402.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Severin Borenstein & James B. Bushnell & Frank A. Wolak, 2002. "Measuring Market Inefficiencies in California's Restructured Wholesale Electricity Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1376-1405, December.
    2. Lucas W. Davis & Catherine Hausman & Nancy L. Rose, 2023. "Transmission Impossible? Prospects for Decarbonizing the US Grid," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 37(4), pages 155-180, Fall.
    3. Mai, Trieu & Bistline, John & Sun, Yinong & Cole, Wesley & Marcy, Cara & Namovicz, Chris & Young, David, 2018. "The role of input assumptions and model structures in projections of variable renewable energy: A multi-model perspective of the U.S. electricity system," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 313-324.
    4. Sánchez-Pérez, P.A. & Staadecker, Martin & Szinai, Julia & Kurtz, Sarah & Hidalgo-Gonzalez, Patricia, 2022. "Effect of modeled time horizon on quantifying the need for long-duration storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    5. Ross Marshall & Ross Baxter, 2002. "Strategic Routeing and Environmental Impact Assessment for Overhead Electrical Transmission Lines," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(5), pages 747-764.
    6. Umair Yaqub Qazi, 2022. "Future of Hydrogen as an Alternative Fuel for Next-Generation Industrial Applications; Challenges and Expected Opportunities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-40, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rangrang Zheng & Greg Schivley & Matthias Fripp & Michael J. Roberts, 2024. "Optimal transmission expansion modestly reduces decarbonization costs of U.S. electricity," Papers 2402.14189, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    2. Milstein, I. & Tishler, A. & Woo, C.K., 2024. "The effect of PV generation's hourly variations on Israel's solar investment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Moore, J. & Woo, C.K. & Horii, B. & Price, S. & Olson, A., 2010. "Estimating the option value of a non-firm electricity tariff," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 1609-1614.
    4. Jordi Brandts & Paul Pezanis‐Christou & Arthur Schram, 2008. "Competition with forward contracts: a laboratory analysis motivated by electricity market design," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 192-214, January.
    5. Julia K. Szinai & David Yates & Pedro A. Sánchez-Pérez & Martin Staadecker & Daniel M. Kammen & Andrew D. Jones & Patricia Hidalgo-Gonzalez, 2024. "Climate change and its influence on water systems increases the cost of electricity system decarbonization," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Chu, Yin & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2020. "Vertical separation of transmission control and market efficiency in the wholesale electricity market," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    7. Ravago, Majah-Leah V. & Jandoc, Karl Robert & Pormon, Miah Maye, 2023. "Reliability and forced outages: Survival analysis with recurrent events," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. C. K. Woo & K. H. Cao & H. Qi & J. Zarnikau & R. Li, 2024. "Price responsiveness of solar and wind capacity demands," Post-Print hal-04597188, HAL.
    9. Jamasb, T., 2002. "Reform and Regulation of the Electricity Sectors in Developing Countries," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0226, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Woo, C.K. & King, M. & Tishler, A. & Chow, L.C.H., 2006. "Costs of electricity deregulation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 747-768.
    11. Newbery, David M. & Greve, Thomas, 2017. "The strategic robustness of oligopoly electricity market models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 124-132.
    12. Moritz Bohland & Sebastian Schwenen, 2020. "Technology Policy and Market Structure: Evidence from the Power Sector," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1856, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    13. Antweiler, Werner & Muesgens, Felix, 2025. "The new merit order: The viability of energy-only electricity markets with only intermittent renewable energy sources and grid-scale storage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    14. Simshauser, Paul, 2024. "On static vs. dynamic line ratings in renewable energy zones," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Chi-Keung Woo, Ira Horowitz, Brian Horii, Ren Orans, and Jay Zarnikau, 2012. "Blowing in the Wind: Vanishing Payoffs of a Tolling Agreement for Natural-gas-fired Generation of Electricity in Texas," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    16. Fabra, Natalia & Toro, Juan, 2005. "Price wars and collusion in the Spanish electricity market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(3-4), pages 155-181, April.
    17. Mansur, Erin T, 2007. "Upstream Competition and Vertical Integration in Electricity Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 125-156, February.
    18. Neuhoff, Karsten & Barquin, Julian & Boots, Maroeska G. & Ehrenmann, Andreas & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Rijkers, Fieke A.M. & Vazquez, Miguel, 2005. "Network-constrained Cournot models of liberalized electricity markets: the devil is in the details," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 495-525, May.
    19. Evans, Lewis & Guthrie, Graeme & Lu, Andrea, 2013. "The role of storage in a competitive electricity market and the effects of climate change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 405-418.
    20. Evangelina Dardati, 2016. "Pollution Permit Systems And Firm Dynamics: How Does The Allocation Scheme Matter?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57(1), pages 305-328, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hae:wpaper:2024-2. 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: UHERO (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/heuhius.html .

    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.