Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization
Summary: As countries pursue power system decarbonization, a well-intentioned strategy being pursued in jurisdictions like China is the strict integration target, often in the form of a curtailment cap. The effects of these curtailment caps have not been systematically studied. Here, we evaluate the...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | iScience |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004223010441 |
| _version_ | 1797774573968556032 |
|---|---|
| author | Yongbin Ding Mingquan Li Ahmed Abdulla Rui Shan Ziyi Liu |
| author_facet | Yongbin Ding Mingquan Li Ahmed Abdulla Rui Shan Ziyi Liu |
| author_sort | Yongbin Ding |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Summary: As countries pursue power system decarbonization, a well-intentioned strategy being pursued in jurisdictions like China is the strict integration target, often in the form of a curtailment cap. The effects of these curtailment caps have not been systematically studied. Here, we evaluate the effects of these caps on the decarbonization of one provincial power system using a capacity expansion model. Results reveal that curtailment caps yield deleterious effects that do not align with the stated goals of these policies. Capping curtailment significantly increases storage capacity (+43% with a 5% curtailment cap) and reduces renewable capacity (−17%). Even with the increase in flexible storage capacity, the policy still jeopardizes power system reliability by increasing occurrences of over or under generation. It also suppresses power generation from hydropower and reduces energy storage utilization while increasing fossil fuel utilization. Capping curtailment increases economic costs (+6% with a 5% curtailment cap) and CO2 emissions (+7%). |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T22:23:03Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d07e31b5aca64d05b0e78b588bd3fd40 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2589-0042 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T22:23:03Z |
| publishDate | 2023-07-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | iScience |
| spelling | doaj.art-d07e31b5aca64d05b0e78b588bd3fd402023-07-23T04:55:00ZengElsevieriScience2589-00422023-07-01267106967Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonizationYongbin Ding0Mingquan Li1Ahmed Abdulla2Rui Shan3Ziyi Liu4School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, ChinaSchool of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China; Laboratory for Low-carbon Intelligent Governance, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China; Corresponding authorDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, CanadaGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Corresponding authorRocky Mountain Institute (RMI), Beijing 100020, ChinaSummary: As countries pursue power system decarbonization, a well-intentioned strategy being pursued in jurisdictions like China is the strict integration target, often in the form of a curtailment cap. The effects of these curtailment caps have not been systematically studied. Here, we evaluate the effects of these caps on the decarbonization of one provincial power system using a capacity expansion model. Results reveal that curtailment caps yield deleterious effects that do not align with the stated goals of these policies. Capping curtailment significantly increases storage capacity (+43% with a 5% curtailment cap) and reduces renewable capacity (−17%). Even with the increase in flexible storage capacity, the policy still jeopardizes power system reliability by increasing occurrences of over or under generation. It also suppresses power generation from hydropower and reduces energy storage utilization while increasing fossil fuel utilization. Capping curtailment increases economic costs (+6% with a 5% curtailment cap) and CO2 emissions (+7%).http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004223010441Energy policyEnergy managementEnergy modeling |
| spellingShingle | Yongbin Ding Mingquan Li Ahmed Abdulla Rui Shan Ziyi Liu Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization iScience Energy policy Energy management Energy modeling |
| title | Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| title_full | Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| title_fullStr | Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| title_full_unstemmed | Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| title_short | Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| title_sort | unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization |
| topic | Energy policy Energy management Energy modeling |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004223010441 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yongbinding unintendedconsequencesofcurtailmentcappoliciesonpowersystemdecarbonization AT mingquanli unintendedconsequencesofcurtailmentcappoliciesonpowersystemdecarbonization AT ahmedabdulla unintendedconsequencesofcurtailmentcappoliciesonpowersystemdecarbonization AT ruishan unintendedconsequencesofcurtailmentcappoliciesonpowersystemdecarbonization AT ziyiliu unintendedconsequencesofcurtailmentcappoliciesonpowersystemdecarbonization |