The Role of Nuclear Power in a Net Zero World - A Power System Times Model Analysis
•
0 likes•36 views
This document presents a model analysis of the role of nuclear power in achieving net zero emissions targets in the United States. It discusses using a Times power system model to examine the economics of new nuclear plants and their impacts on decarbonizing the electricity sector. The analysis will look at four scenarios: costs of nuclear power, impacts on critical minerals, different emissions reduction pathways, and the effects of policies like the Inflation Reduction Act. The model aims to determine the competitiveness of nuclear power and prospects for replacing fossil fuels to 2030 and achieving zero-carbon electricity by 2035 and 2050.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to The Role of Nuclear Power in a Net Zero World - A Power System Times Model Analysis
Similar to The Role of Nuclear Power in a Net Zero World - A Power System Times Model Analysis (20)
More from IEA-ETSAP
More from IEA-ETSAP (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The Role of Nuclear Power in a Net Zero World - A Power System Times Model Analysis
- 1. PRESENTATION The Role of Nuclear Power in a Net Zero World – A Power System Times Model Analysis Emeka R. Ochu • June 2023 3
- 2. CGEP - Where the World Connects THEMES REGIONS ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY & MARKETS GEOPOLITICS & SECURITY AMERICAS ASIA + PACIFIC CHINA INDIA EUROPE RUSSIA + EURASIA MIDDLE EAST + NORTH AFRICA SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA RENEWABLE ENERGY ENERGY FOR DEVELOPMENT ENERGY MARKETS OIL POWER SECTOR CLIMATE POLICY NUCLEAR NATURAL GAS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CARBON MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INITIATIVES Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University
- 3. Decarbonization of Power Sector Emissions is Key U.S. GHG Emissions = 6,340.2 million metric tons of CO2 Power Sector = 40% of Global energy-related emissions Power Sector Emissions = 25% of US GHG Emissions (2021) Power Sector Emissions = + 6.9% (coal power) Change in generation mix in 2021, with increase in the share of coal while zero-carbon power remained same in 2020 led to a 4% in carbon intensity of electricity. To support the goal of reducing global temperatures to zero by 2050, the US NDC sets a target of net GHG emissions by 50-52% below 2005 levels in 2030 Zero-carbon electricity generation by 2035 GHG emissions by Economic Sector; EPA (2021)
- 4. Nuclear Power Can Help Decarbonization of Power A “broad-based approach to deploying energy sector mitigation options can reduce emissions over the next ten years and set the stage for still deeper reductions beyond 2030.” (IPCC, 2022). Nuclear Power is stable and low-C intensity – 100gCO2e/kWh on LC basis – can replace coal & NG to power large-scale grids Combining nuclear power with renewable energy can provide baseload capacity replacing fossil fuels. Also useful for power Industrial & Transport sector processes that otherwise required high-C fuels 444 operational reactors = 10% of global electricity generation = 394 gigawatts of electricity Nuclear Energy Agency (2021)
- 5. Problem Statement & Model Formulation Does the Nuclear Power generation economics fit into the US power sector decarbonization strategy? Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University Objectives • Examine the economics of new nuclear plants in a system-wide electricity TIMES model for the US ❖ Involves updating the energy system US TIMES model to include nuclear power costs, lead times, etc. ❖ Also involves creating the unit commitment constraints for nuclear start-up costs, ramp up and shutdown rates, minimum up/down times, etc. • Examine the role of nuclear power in a decarbonized energy market, as government policies such as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), governments, business models continue to evolve. Key Questions: 1. What are the prospects for nuclear power in achieving energy sector decarbonization towards 2030 and net zero 2050? 2. What does the Levelized Cost of Carbon Abatement (LCCA) of nuclear power look like and how price-competitive is nuclear power in achieving deep decarbonization? 3. How does the IRA help? 4. What additional unique advantage increases the reliability of nuclear power over renewable power? Model Formulation/Structure Our model will assume: Economy-wide electrification with the introduction of 2 new nuclear technologies (Light Water Reactor and Small Modular Reactor) to analyze the relative effect of nuclear power on the decarbonization of the electricity sector in a Business As Usual (BAU), Optimistic (IPCC 1.5C Net Zero Scenarios by 2030 & 2050), and Moderate (IPCC 2.0C Scenario) perspectives, reflected across all scenarios. 7
- 6. Understanding a Levelized Cost of Carbon Abatement (LCCA) Recent Sovereign and Corporate Net-Zero emissions commitments involves investment decision making Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University What is the Value of doing a LCCA? • Decisions on the optimum level and pathway to achieve targets requires a cost-assessment methodology to determine what pathways, technologies, policies and pathways to achieve targets at the most cost-effective cost, and in what geographies • And these must be estimated in a levelized manner A LCCA: • Measures how much CO2 can be reduced by a specific investment, project, or policy, taking into account relevant factors related to geography and specific assets. • It calculates how much an investment or policy costs on the basis of dollars per ton of emissions reduced. LCCA Vs a MAC • Due to averaging and similar generalizations, many MAC and IAM estimates lack detailed local/regional specificity. • Similarly, neither approach provides technical details based on consistent assumptions (Kesicki, 2013), which can limit understanding of where to invest marginal dollars, what policies will yield the most CO2 reduction, and what sectors to prioritize. • Many dynamic effects, e.g., rebound, are not incorporated in these approaches. • Consequently, MAC and IAM approaches underestimate costs and do not fully represent required investments within the energy transition. 8
- 7. Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Lorem Ipsum Dolr xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Lorem Ipsum Dolor xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Total xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 2020 US Electricity Sector Unit Capacities 9 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University
- 8. Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor Lorem Ipsum Dolor xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Lorem Ipsum Dolr xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Lorem Ipsum Dolor xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Total xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 2020 Nuclear Power Unit Capacities 10 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University
- 9. Scenario Design 4 Key Scenarios Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University Scenario 1: Cost Scenario There are limited data points in more recent decades for costs to build a nuclear power plant in the US. • This scenario will evaluate the relative cost of building a nuclear power plant vs the total energy system. • The goal will be to analyze the levelized cost of a nuclear power plant per emissions reduced to the entire energy system, and deduce the cost of carbon emissions abatement from nuclear power vs other energy production pathways. • What is the impact of innovation in new reactor technologies on the levelized cost of nuclear power? How economically competitive are new nuclear plants vs other pathways? Scenario 2: Critical Minerals • This scenario examines the role critical minerals such chromium, copper, manganese, etc. in clean energy transition • Traces the commodity flow of critical minerals in nuclear power generation, renewable power, and the entire system-wide impact in the US 11 ~TFM_MIG TimeSlice LimType Attribute Year1 Year2 SourceScen AllRegions Pset_PN INVCOST 2020 2030ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.6558526011560 69 E_NUC*01 INVCOST 2020 2050ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.3117052023121 39 E_NUC*01 FIXOM 2020 2030ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.6558526011560 69 E_NUC*01 FIXOM 2020 2050ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.3117052023121 39 E_NUC*01 VAROM 2020 2030ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.6558526011560 69 E_NUC*01 VAROM 2020 2050ELE_EIA_AEO2022 *0.3117052023121 39 E_NUC*01 ~TFM_INS TimeSlice LimType Attribute Year AllRegions Pset_Set Pset_PN Cset_CN I:Unit kt/GW NCAP_ICOM 0.0005 E_NUC_*01 Cd NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Ce NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Co NCAP_ICOM 2.1900 E_NUC_*01 Cr NCAP_ICOM 1.4730 E_NUC_*01 Cu NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Dy NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Er NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Eu NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Ga NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Gd NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Ho NCAP_ICOM 0.0016 E_NUC_*01 In NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 La NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Lu NCAP_ICOM 0.1480 E_NUC_*01 Mn NCAP_ICOM 0.0710 E_NUC_*01 Mo NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Nd NCAP_ICOM 1.2970 E_NUC_*01 Ni NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Pm NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Pr NCAP_ICOM 0.0010 E_NUC_*01 REE NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Sc NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Si NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Sm NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Tb NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Te NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Tm NCAP_ICOM 0.0005 E_NUC_*01 Y NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Yb NCAP_ICOM 0.0000 E_NUC_*01 Zn NCAP_ICOM 0.0940 E_NUC_*01 Ot
- 10. Scenario Design 4 Key Scenarios Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University Scenario 3: Emissions Reduction Scenario • Examines the impact of nuclear power generation to the power sector decarbonization of the U.S. in a BAU, moderate and optimistic scenario • Analyses the prospects of nuclear power in achieving the US NDC of zero-C electricity generation by 2035 • Key parameters include current power sector emissions for 2020 (our upper limit), assume 50% power sector emissions reduction target for 2030 with zero-carbon scenario in 2035 and 2050 also. Scenario 4: Policy & Financing Incentives Scenario Financing incentives have played a significant role in incentivizing development and market penetration of nascent technologies. IRA provides for both existing and new nuclear capacities. 12 Type of power plants Operation Service Period Site (region) Incentive Existing 2024-2032 All PTC: $15/MWh New installations From 2025 Regular Either a PTC: $25/MWh or ITC: 30% of investment cost Brown field site/fossil community bonus (+10%) PTC: $27.5/MWh or ITC: 40% of investment costs
- 11. Regional Electricity Demand Increase (TWh) by 2050 13 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University
- 12. Nuclear Capacity Declines in BAU Case 14 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University
- 13. IRA Helps Nuclear Contribution to Electricity Generation Mix 15 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University 774 774 760 821 297 1032 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 BAU IRA BAU IRA BAU IRA 2020 2030 2050 Generation (TWh) BAU vs IRA Generation Mix (TWh) Wind CSP SPV Nuclear MSW Hydro Geothermal Gas Coal Biomass 21% 21% 18% 19% 6% 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% BAU IRA BAU IRA BAU IRA 2020 2030 2050 Generation (TWh) BAU vs IRA Generation Mix (TWh) Wind CSP SPV Nuclear MSW Hydro Geothermal Gas Coal Biomass
- 14. Thoughts on Future Analysis 16 Center on Global Energy Policy | Columbia University • IRA ▪ Recalibrate unit commitment files to see how Nuclear capacities respond to ramp rates changes, etc. ▪ Include PTC • Run Net Zero 2035 & 2050 scenarios to deduce impact on nuclear generation capacities in both an accelerated and moderate policy scenario • More region-specific analysis ▪ Prospects of deducing which states without current nuclear capacities might benefit from IRA to develop newer capacities
- 15. Thank you.