CCPP Project Status as of June, 2008
Ongoing Projects:
1) Carbon capture and storage
2) State/Federal GHG market integration
3) Forest biomass supply analysis
4) Farm and forest offsets
5) Carbon emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles
New Projects:
6) Barriers to technology deployment
7) Regulatory oversight/transparency for the carbon market
8) Natural gas price modeling
9) Policy options for biofuels
Additional Projects:
Student Projects Completed in Spring 2008
1) Carbon capture and storage
Summary:
Coal combustion for electricity generation produces carbon emissions. Currently, those emissions are released and trapped in the atmosphere. Advanced technologies can, however, capture the carbon before it is released, transport it via pipelines, and inject it underground for long-term storage. Before carbon capture and storage (CCS) can be applied on a large scale, policy needs to be developed to regulate pipeline and storage site location and clarify risk and liability. The CCPP is developing a geographic information system (GIS) database and model to determine likely CO2 pipeline corridors, and evaluating the legal and regulatory implications associated with a pipelie network. The CCS working group is also developing a model to analyze injection rates and cost projections for sequestration sites, taking into account geologic variability.
Outreach Efforts:
Eric Williams and Jonas Monast met with staff from the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and several Senate offices to inform them about the CCPP’s CCS project and offer our assistance as they determine how Congress can best support the development of an efficient CO2 pipeline network. The CCPP has received requests for information from the National Mining Association and other Senate offices.
Publications:
Carbon Capture, Pipeline and Storage: A Viable Option for North Carolina Utilities? (March 2007)
A paper examining the economic viability of geosequestration in sandstone saline aquifers is in draft form and is expected to be submitted for publication this summer. The paper is written by Jordan Eccles, a PhD student at the Nicholas School, and coauthored by Drs. Lincoln Pratson, Rob Jackson, and Richard Newell.
Experts: Lincoln Pratson, Rob Jackson, Eric Williams, Munich Chandel, Dalia Patino-Echeverri, Jordan Eccles
Contact: Eric Williams, e.l.williams@duke.edu, 919-613-8714
2) State/Federal GHG market integration
Summary:
Attention to the states’ role(s) in federal climate policy has increased this spring. As more and more states and regions begin experimenting with their own cap-and-trade systems, it is important that lawmakers consider how a federal carbon market should address the state and regional carbon markets that are in operation before the federal market is implemented. Regional/state carbon market initiatives currently under development have been investigated, and alternatives for addressing these initiatives within a federal GHG emissions cap-and-trade system have been identified. The political and administrative challenges presented by each approach have been highlighted.
Outreach Efforts:
Since releasing a draft of the paper analyzing options for integrating state and federal carbon markets, Jonas Monast has been involved in discussions with state regulators and congressional staff to analyze the bottom-line positions for the states. He has also provided briefings for the Clean Energy Group and the Western Governors Association regarding the state/federal carbon market integration paper, and has attended conferences at Harvard and Yale focusing aspects of state/federal climate policy.
Publications:
Integrating State, Regional, and Federal Greenhouse Gas Markets: Options and Tradeoffs. Draft article released on CCPP and Nicholas Institute websites in early March. Final publication in the Duke Environmental Law and Policy Forum expected in June 2008.
Experts: Jonas Monast, Tim Profeta
Contact: Jonas Monast, jonas.monast@duke.edu, 919-681-7188
3) Forest biomass supply analysis
Summary:
Focus on domestic sources of energy and concern over global climate change is placing increased emphasis on renewables. Biomass can be used for a variety of renewable applications, including electricity production (“bioenergy”), biofuel and bioproduct production, residential heating, and industrial heat and processing energy. Forest biomass represents a key component of available national and regional biomass supply, but the availability of forest biomass is limited over short time periods by both the amount of land in forests and the rate of forest growth. Therefore, an increased use of forest biomass for bioenergy, biofuels, or wood and paper products will likely impact all other users of the forest resource. This project explores the interaction of logging residues and roundwood supply, as well as the potential supply costs of woody biomass for bioenergy and biofuel production. The ability of forest biomass to satisfy regional biomass electricity production requirements under a national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) is also estimated. In future work, geographic variability of forest biomass will be evaluated, as will the impact of other exogenous factors affecting the forest land base and the management of forest resources, such as loss of forest land to other uses and the emergence of carbon offset markets. Finally, demand elasticities by market will be incorporated, shedding light on which users are likely to be squeezed out by rising roundwood demand.
Galik, C.S., R.C. Abt, and Y. Wu. 2008. Forest Biomass Supply in the Southeastern United States -- Implications for Industrial Roundwood and Bioenergy Production. (forthcoming)
Experts: Christopher Galik, Bob Abt (N.C. State University)
Contact: Christopher Galik, christopher.galik@duke.edu, 919-681-7193
4) Farm and forest offsets
Summary:
Forests and agriculture will play significant roles in a carbon-constrained economy. The CCPP is working together with the Nicholas Institute to develop policy recommendations that provide the framework for a comprehensive offsets program under a federal cap-and-trade program. On the ground, a variety of carbon offset protocols have emerged in the absence of a federal standard. These protocols, issued by numerous states and voluntary registries, often address similar concepts such as baseline, additionality, and permanence, but more often than not define them differently and establish differing ways to evaluate them in the course of the project. It remains to be seen, however, whether these various protocols result in any significant differences in creditable carbon sequestration or any significant differences in transaction costs for those implementing the project. Work is underway to answer these questions by conducting side-by-side “road tests” of forest management offset protocols. Work is also underway to evaluate the various factors that may influence risk of forest offset carbon loss (“reversal”) in a changing climate.
Publications:
Olander, L., T. Profeta, B. Murray, C. Galik, and M. Dawson. 2008. Designing offsets policy for the U.S.: principles, challenges, and options for encouraging domestic and international emissions reductions and sequestration from uncapped entities as part of a federal cap-and-trade for greenhouse gases. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University. Durham, NC. 130p.
Galik, C., D. Richter, and M. Mobley. 2008. A critical comparison and “road test” of forest management carbon offset protocols. (forthcoming)
Experts: Christopher Galik, Lydia Olander, Rob Jackson, Dan Richter
Contact: Christopher Galik, christopher.galik@duke.edu, 919-681-719
5) Carbon emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles
Summary:
A variation of hybrid vehicles known as a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) has gained a lot of attention because of the potential for 100+ MPG fuel efficiency. Drivers can charge the batteries in plug-in hybrids straight from an electrical outlet in addition to adding gasoline, but consuming electricity also has a cost and generates carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Few researchers have conducted rigorous studies on the complicated emissions profile of plug-in hybrids. To investigate whether plug-in hybrids lead to emission reductions or emission increases, we use the Nicholas Institute’s version of the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) to evaluate the electricity sector’s response to different projections of plug-in hybrids – from 2% to 76% of all vehicles in 2030.
Publications:
Eric William’s Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Analysis is expected out in July, 2008.
Contact: Eric Williams, e.l.williams@duke.edu, 919-613-8714
6) Barriers to technology deployment
Summary:
To move the technology debate from concept to reality, the CCPP will be focusing on barriers to deploying clean energy technologies and formulating policy solutions to overcome those barriers. Low/no-carbon baseload power generation technologies including wind, nuclear, and coal-fired power with carbon capture and sequestration will be considered. The investigation will consider timelines for implementation, regulatory, technical, social and economic barriers, and environmental co-effects.
A subset of the project will investigate the potential and limitations of reduce electricity demand by improving energy efficiency. A possible target is to assess the feasibility and potential of extending some best-practice at the state level (Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standards, Public Benefits Funds, Appliance Standards, and Building Codes) to national programs.
Experts: Chi-Jen Yang, David Hoppock
Contact: Chi-Jen Yang, cj.y@duke.edu, 919-681-7191
7) Regulatory oversight/transparency for the carbon market
Summary:
There is concern among legislators about how to best design market oversight, enforcement, and transparency into the carbon market. The project will analyze options for Congress to incorporate transparency and oversight into the design of the carbon market and will evaluate the authority of new governmental entities created to regulate aspects of the market. The CCPP will also participate in Duke University's new Carbon Market Initiative, a joint project of the Nicholas Institute and the Fuqua School of Business.
Experts: Jonas Monast, Tim Profeta, Brian Murray and Jon Anda (a visiting fellow brought in to create a carbon market initiative with the Nicholas Institute and the Fuqua School of Business)
Contact: Jonas Monast, jonas.monast@duke.edu, 919-681-7188
8) Natural gas price modeling
Summary:
Using the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) with different assumptions for natural gas supply and carbon pricing, the project will investigate how natural gas prices in North America are affected under various scenarios.
Experts: Eric Williams, David Hoppock
Contact: David Hoppock, david.hoppock@duke.edu, 919-681-9711
9) Policy options for biofuels
Summary:
Work is underway to identify and describe the various options by which biofuels can be integrated into a comprehensive climate policy framework. In such an expansive and far-reaching public policy challenge as addressing global climate change, duplication, redundancy, omission, and cross-purposing of provisions is a very real possibility. This is especially true for biofuels, a segment that has emerged as a central component of U.S. strategies to address dependence on foreign oil and climate change.
Experts: Christopher Galik, Justin Baker
Contact: Christopher Galik, christopher.galik@duke.edu, 919-681-7193
Student Projects Completed in Spring 2008
Chelsea Conover - The Biodiesel Industry: Feedstocks, Capacity, and Subsidies (PDF of Executive Summary)
Anna Frankel - Geospatial Analysis of Pathways for Carbon Sequestration
(PDF of Executive Summary)
Kristin Igusky - Quantifying Albedo and Surface Temperature over Different Land Covers: Implications for Carbon Offsets
(PDF of Executive Summary)
(PDF of Executive Summary)
Sonya Reinhardt - Economic Barriers to the Expansion of Nuclear Power in the United States
(PDF of Executive Summary)
Note: reports can be ordered in their entirety by contacting us directly: ccpp@nicholas.duke.edu.