Examining the feasibility of converting New York State’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to one using wind, water, and sunlight

Jacobson, Mark Z.; Howarth, Robert W.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Scobie, Stan R.; Barth, Jannette M.; Dvorak, Michael J.; Klevze, Megan; Katkhuda, Hind; Miranda, Brian; Chowdhury, Navid; Jones, Rick; Plano, Larsen; Ingraffea, Anthony R.

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.02.036

Cited by 100 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of a recent development of Jacobson et al works [46][47][48][49] for Washington State [49] is summarized below. To place this work in context, as of 2014, the state had 26% share of renewables in total energy consumption (i.e., 16% of hydro, 6% of biomass, and 4% of other renewables) [114].…”

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jacobson et al [46][47][48][49] proposed and evaluated the technical, economic and social benefits of a 100% wind water sunlight (WWW) roadmap to implement the use of on-and off-shore wind, hydropower, CSP, geothermal, solar PV, tidal, and wave, for electricity and electrolytic hydrogen production to meet the entire electricity, mobility, heating/cooling, and industrial energy demands of New York [46], California [47] and Washington [49] States, and the contiguous USA [48] in 2050. These studies built upon methodologies developed and applied at global scale in [44,45], and led to similar overall, qualitative conclusions.…”

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the review presented in this and subsequent sections is synthesized in Section 5 in terms of PtG deployment scale, geographical location, PtG products, power and CO 2 sources, PtG products and sub-processes, energy/material integration, economics and modeling/optimization methodologies. Barton and Gammon (2010) [43] UK; 2050; RE N/R Solar PV, solar thermal, tidal energy, wave energy, on/off-shore wind, biomass, waste, hydroelectricity H 2 for mobility, industry, power, gas grid injection and conversion to other fuels Process N/R; Capacities of 61.4 GW and 107.1 GW for "high renewable share" and "high nuclear share" scenarios, respectively N/A Jacobson et al (2011,(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)) [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] California, New York, and Washington states, USA; All USA; World; 2050; 100% RE On/off-shore wind, hydropower, CSP, geothermal, solar PV, tidal, wave H 2 for ground, sea and air transportation; industrial and building heat generation Process and capacity N/R; 70% efficiency N/A Gutiérrez-Martín and Guerrero-Hernández (2012) [52] Spain; 2011-2020; 42% RE Wind, solar thermal, solar PV, hydroelectricity, nuclear H 2 for mobility or power (peak shaving) 53 nos. 50 [58] Spain; Timeline N/R; 31% RE Wind, solar thermal, solar PV, hydroelectricity, nuclear H 2 potentially for heating, power, synthetic fuel production or gas grid injection 300 nos 50 MW AEL (efficiency calculated) N/A Clegg and Mancarella (2015) [59] UK; 2030; 48% RE Wind H 2 and SNG for gas grid injection Process and capacity N/R; 73% efficiency Process N/R; 73% power-to-H 2 and 64% power-to-SNG efficiencies; CO 2 source N/R Qadrdan et al (2015) [60] UK; 2020; RE N/R Wind H 2 for gas grid injection Process N/R;~5-12 GW capacity; 70% efficiency N/A Ahern et al (2015) [61] Republic of Ireland; 2030; RE N/R Wind SNG for transport Process and capacity N/R; 75% efficiency Biological; 80% efficiency; 60% power-to-SNG efficiency; Anaerobic digestion biogas-derived CO 2 Vandewalle et al (2015) [62] Belgium; Timeline N/R; 69-76% RE (wo/w PtG)…”

Section: Regional To National-scalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies built upon methodologies developed and applied at global scale in [44,45], and led to similar overall, qualitative conclusions. No direct reference to PtG nor power-to-thermal was made in [44][45][46][47][48][49], where PtG/PtH are part of a range of storage technologies to ensure grid reliability (i.e., solar thermal heat storage via soil, PtH combined with soil and water, power-to-cold via ice, and electricity storage via phase change materials, hydropower reservoirs, pumped hydro, batteries, and hydrogen). Hydrogen was produced electrolytically at an assumed 70% efficiency, after all electricity storage and thermal storage capacities were charged, and stored in either compressed gas or liquefied form [44].…”

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The electrolytic hydrogen was mainly used for mobility, in fuel cell-and hybrid fuel cell-battery powered transportation, when batteries were not economical (i.e., for long-range and heavy ground transport, shipping, and air transport). Some electrolytic hydrogen was combusted for industrial high-grade heat [46][47][48][49] and building heat [46] generation. Distributed, rather than remote electrolysis, was suggested to avoid energy losses in hydrogen distribution [47].…”

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Review of Projected Power-to-Gas Deployment Scenarios

Eveloy

Gebreegziabher

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technical, economic and environmental assessments of projected power-to-gas (PtG) deployment scenarios at distributed-to national-scale are reviewed, as well as their extensions to nuclear-assisted renewable hydrogen. Their collective research trends, outcomes, challenges and limitations are highlighted, leading to suggested future work areas. These studies have focused on the conversion of excess wind and solar photovoltaic electricity in European-based energy systems using low-temperature electrolysis technologies. Synthetic natural gas, either solely or with hydrogen, has been the most frequent PtG product. However, the spectrum of possible deployment scenarios has been incompletely explored to date, in terms of geographical/sectorial application environment, electricity generation technology, and PtG processes, products and their end-uses to meet a given energy system demand portfolio. Suggested areas of focus include PtG deployment scenarios: (i) incorporating concentrated solar-and/or hybrid renewable generation technologies; (ii) for energy systems facing high cooling and/or water desalination/treatment demands; (iii) employing high-temperature and/or hybrid hydrogen production processes; and (iv) involving PtG material/energy integrations with other installations/sectors. In terms of PtG deployment simulation, suggested areas include the use of dynamic and load/utilization factor-dependent performance characteristics, dynamic commodity prices, more systematic comparisons between power-to-what potential deployment options and between product end-uses, more holistic performance criteria, and formal optimizations.

show abstract

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regional To National-scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Review of Projected Power-to-Gas Deployment Scenarios

Eveloy

Gebreegziabher

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Greenhouse gas emissions from domestic hot water: heat pumps compared to most commonly used systems

Hong

Howarth

2016

Energy Science & Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We estimate the emissions of the two most important greenhouse gasses (GHG), carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and methane (CH 4 ), from the use of modern high-efficiency heat pump water heaters compared to the most commonly used domestic hot water systems: natural gas storage tanks, tankless natural gas demand heaters, electric resistance storage tanks, and tankless electric resistance heaters. We considered both natural gas-powered electric plants and coal-powered plants as the source of the electricity for the heat pumps, the thermal electric storage tanks, and the tankless electric demand heaters. The time-integrated radiative forcing associated with using a heat pump water heater was always smaller than any other means of heating water considered in this study across all time frames including at 20 and 100 years. The estimated amount of CH 4 lost during its lifecycle was the most critical factor determining the relative magnitude of the climatic impact. The greatest net climatic benefit within the 20-year time frame was predicted to be achieved when a storage natural gas water heater (the most common system for domestic hot water in the United States) fueled by shale gas was replaced with a high efficiency heat pump water heater powered by coal-generated electricity; the heat pump system powered by renewable electricity would have had an even greater climatic benefit, but was not explicitly modeled in this study. Our analysis provides the first assessment of the GHG footprint associated with using a heat pump water heater, which we demonstrate to be an effective and economically viable way of reducing emissions of GHGs. 124

show abstract

A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas

Howarth

2014

Energy Science & Engineering

Self Cite

324

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In April 2011, we published the first peer-reviewed analysis of the greenhouse gas footprint (GHG) of shale gas, concluding that the climate impact of shale gas may be worse than that of other fossil fuels such as coal and oil because of methane emissions. We noted the poor quality of publicly available data to support our analysis and called for further research. Our paper spurred a large increase in research and analysis, including several new studies that have better measured methane emissions from natural gas systems. Here, I review this new research in the context of our 2011 paper and the fifth assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in 2013. The best data available now indicate that our estimates of methane emission from both shale gas and conventional natural gas were relatively robust. Using these new, best available data and a 20-year time period for comparing the warming potential of methane to carbon dioxide, the conclusion stands that both shale gas and conventional natural gas have a larger GHG than do coal or oil, for any possible use of natural gas and particularly for the primary uses of residential and commercial heating. The 20-year time period is appropriate because of the urgent need to reduce methane emissions over the coming 15-35 years.

show abstract

Examining the feasibility of converting New York State’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to one using wind, water, and sunlight

Cited by 100 publications

References 41 publications

A Review of Projected Power-to-Gas Deployment Scenarios

A Review of Projected Power-to-Gas Deployment Scenarios

Greenhouse gas emissions from domestic hot water: heat pumps compared to most commonly used systems

A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About