Climate change and extreme weather events can significantly impact energy infrastructure in three main ways: 1. Extraction and resources are threatened by rising sea levels, melting permafrost, and flooding which can damage offshore oil/gas rigs, mines, and disrupt supply chains. 2. Conversion processes from different sources like thermal, nuclear, and hydro face efficiency losses from higher temperatures, drought, and flooding which can force shutdowns. 3. Transmission and distribution networks are vulnerable to weather damage from high winds, flooding, lightning, and overheating which causes blackouts. The economic costs of not adapting energy systems to these impacts include physical damage, lost output, higher prices, and macroeconomic losses

1. IMPACTS OF CLIMATE
AND EXTREME
WEATHER ON ENERGY
INFRASTRUCTURE
Eric Williams
Energy /
Environmental
Economist
International Atomic
Energy Agency

2. OVERVIEW
Climate change (CC) & extreme weather
event (EWE) impacts on energy system
Economic impacts of CC & EWE in the
energy sector

3. CC & EWE
Climate change (CC) = changes in mean and variability
over decades:
 Temperature
 Precipitation
 Wind patterns
 Insolation
 Sea level rise
Extreme weather events (EWE) = event near the upper or
lower end of the range of observed values (frequency,
intensity, timing) of:
 High/low temperature & precipitation
 High winds/storms
 Hail
 Lightning, etc.

4. CC & EWE IMPACTS ON
ENERGY SYSTEM
Extraction/Resource Transport Conversion
Transmission
& Distribution

5. EXTRACTION/RESOURCE
Coal and Uranium:
 flooding open-pit mines
 dust from coal stockpiles
Oil & gas:
 melting permafrost ->
destabilizing equipment
 sea level rise: inundating
coastal and offshore sites
 See level rise + winds:
damage to onshore wells
and offshore platforms
Hydro:
 higher evaporation losses
 changes in water availability
Wind:
 changes in wind resource
Solar:
 changes in insolation

6. TRANSPORT FROM SOURCE
TO CONVERSION
Ocean-going ships:
 Less sea-ice = more opportunities for passage
 Sea-level rise may affect ports and limit options for large vessels
Inland ships:
 Difficult passage for extreme low and extreme high water levels
Rail & roads:
 Freeze-thaw cycle leads to damage
 High temp: tracks deform; roads soften
 Low temp: RR switches freeze; roads crack
Pipelines:
 Low temp: can weaken/damage pipelines
 High temp: increased corrosion and greater energy requirements for
compression

7. CONVERSION: THERMAL
CC: temps increase
 thermal efficiency decreases by 0.1 to 0.2% per 1 C° increase
 cooling efficiency decreases: capacity loss of 1 – 2% per 1 C° increase
CC + EWE:
 Extreme temp: larger efficiency loss and cooling challenge
 Drought: even less and warmer cooling water
 Temp & drought: acute cooling problem
 Winds: can damage cooling towers

8. CONVERSION: NUCLEAR
CC: same as thermal
 Temps go up, thermal and
cooling efficiency goes
down
CC + EWE:
 Nuclear is a special case
because of safety concerns
related to EWEs
 Although Fukushima was
not climate- or weather-
related, it highlighted the
vulnerability of nuclear
plants to events that were
not considered in design
and construction

9. CONVERSION: NUCLEAR
CC + EWE:
 Nuclear plants are built to withstand 50- to
100-year extreme weather events, but as
climate changes, past events may not predict
the severity of future events
 Nuclear plants are very complicated systems;
many kinds of EWEs, when combined with an
unknown design or construction flaw, can
trigger safety systems and force a shutdown
 Most nuclear plants rely on active safety systems powered
by diesel generators; worst case scenario: an EWE forces a
reactor shutdown while simultaneously, disrupting back up
generators and grid interconnects

10. CONVERSION: NUCLEAR
Lightning: can short-circuit instrumentation,
back-up gen connection, grid connection
High winds: wind-generated missiles can
damage buildings, back-up gen, knock out grid
connection
Extreme cold: ice clogging water cooling intake
Extreme heat: if water for cooling is too hot,
can force shutdown
Flooding: coastal plants vulnerable to storm
surge; inland plants vulnerable to river
flooding; safety systems can be damaged

11. CONVERSION: NUCLEAR
Storm surges and
sea-level rise in
2050:
 Key:
 Green: no flooding
 Yellow: potential flooding
 Orange: considerable
flooding
 Red: Site inundation
 Grey: no data
 Source: Kopytko 2007
St.
Lucie
Crystal
River
Turkey
Point
Sea-
Brook
Pil-
grim
Mill-
stone
Calvert
Cliffs
Sea Level Rise
Nor’easter
Category I Low
Category I High
Category II
Category III
Category IV Low
Category IV High
Category V

12. CONVERSION: NUCLEAR
IAEA’s International Reporting
System (IRS)
 88% of CC/EWE events affect 3 major
systems
 Water cooling: 28%
 Electrical control systems: 27%
 Transmission grid: 32%
 Remainder of events were general (e.g.
flooding)
From 1980 – 1999, events are
balanced between lightning
(33%), winds (33%), and
freezing (30%)
In the 2000s, heat related
events began to appear

13. CONVERSION: OIL & GAS
REFINERIES
CC: sea level rise inundating coastal refineries
CC + EWE:
 Precipitation: flooding refineries
 Winds: physical damage
 Lightning: structural damage; fires

14. CONVERSION: HYDRO
CC:
 Lower precipitation = lower
long-term capacity and
output

15. CONVERSION: HYDRO
CC + EWE:
 Flooding: structural damage to dam wall or
turbines from water force and debris
 Flooding + winds: waves causing dam
overflow

16. CONVERSION: WIND
CC:
 Changes in the spatio-temporal wind resource
distribution; mean wind power densities over
Europe and NA likely within ±50% of current
values
 Less frequent icing with increasing temp
 Lower precipitation: more dust deposition
 Sea level rise: inundating coastal and offshore
sites

17. CONVERSION: WIND
CC + EWE:
 Winds: structural damage
 Low temps + precipitation: ice formation on blades reducing
efficiency; structural damage
 Lightning: structural damage

18. CONVERSION: SOLAR
CC:
 Increasing temp: lower PV and CSP
efficiency
 Changes in cloudiness and average
insolation
CC + EWE:
 Increased precipitation, high winds, hail
and high temperatures can each damage
PV and CSP
 Drought + winds: more sand and dust
deposited on collectors, reducing
efficiency of PV and CSP

19. TRANSMISSION &
DISTRIBUTIONRail, road, inland waterways,
pipelines: same issues as
transport from source to
conversion
Electric grid:
 CC: decreasing transmission efficiency of 0.4%
per 1 C° increase
 CC + EWE:
 High temp: lines and transformers overheat, capacity
declines & outages
 Low temp: ice -> damage & outages
 Lightning: damage & outages
 Winds: damage & outages
 Flooding: damage & outages

20. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Costs of not adapting
Adaptation options
Results of economic impact studies

21. COSTS OF NOT ADAPTING
Direct costs:
 Physical damage to infrastructure
 Reduced output and outages
 e.g. every 24 hours a 1 GW unit is shut down costs the owner $1.2
million (assuming $50/MWh)
Indirect costs:
 Outages that lead to wider blackouts can impose
substantial indirect costs
 Value of lost load in developed countries ranges from 200 to 960
million euros for a 24 hour blackout (based on lost output for a 1
GW plant) (Nooij et al. 2007, Tol 2007)
 Cumulative macroeconomic costs from physical
damage, need for additional capacity, outages, etc.

22. ADAPTATION OPTIONS
Investments in adaptation can avoid or
mitigate some costs
Options too numerous to catalogue here
General approaches fall within 3 categories
 Physical protection
 e.g. building sea walls and other earthworks to protect
coastal energy infrastructure from sea-level rise and
storm surges
 Alternative technologies
 e.g. dry cooling for thermal power plants
 Alternative operational strategies
 e.g. sophisticated computer modeling to better manage
hydropower resources under changing rainfall patterns

23. CC: DECENT COVERAGE IN
STUDIES
○ = not modelled
● = modelled Wind Solar Hydro Thermal Nuclear Grid Coal
Oil &
Gas
Higher mean
temperatures* ○ ○ ○ ● ● ● ○
Changes in rainfall
patterns ● ● ●
Changes in wind
patterns ●
Changes in average
insolation ●

24. CGE STUDIES: PRIMARILY
GRADUAL CLIMATE CHANGE
GDP impacts in most studies on the
order of -1% in 2050+ but up to -3%
With some assumptions about
adaptation investments, studies find that
GDP impacts can be close to zero
 Not based on specific adaptation measures, so
these results are questionable
Warmer regions tend to have a greater
impact than cooler regions

25. PARTIAL EQUILIBRIUM
STUDIES: CC
Results not in terms of GDP, but mostly
consistent with CGE results when
examining longer-term gradual climate
change
 ~1% increase in electricity demand in warmer countries
 ~1% decrease in demand in cooler countries

26. MODELING EXTREME
WEATHER EVENTS
Extreme weather events occur with a low
probability (perhaps increasing with CC) and
are difficult to model
One approach is to make a general assumption
about aggregate impacts of extreme weather
 Done in one study (Jochem and Schade et al. 2009)
Another approach is to develop probabilities of
events with varying intensity and
corresponding damages and include them
stochastically within a detailed technology-
based energy model
 To date, this approach has not been taken

27. EWE: VERY LIMITED COVERAGE
○ = not modelled
● = modelled Wind Solar Hydro Thermal Nuclear Grid Coal
Oil &
Gas
Lightning ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
High winds ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Hailstorms ○
Sand storms and
dust ○ ○ ○
Extreme cold ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Extreme heat*
○ ○ ● ● ● ● ○ ○
Floods ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Drought
● ● ● ○
Sea-level rise ○ ○ ○ ○

28. PARTIAL EQUILIBRIUM
MODELS: EWE
More significant impacts with extreme
weather
 Electricity prices in Nordic countries can
double over a 2 year period during a
hypothetical water shortage scenario (Bye et
al. 2006)
 A drought scenario in the US southwest can
lead to average monthly electricity prices that
are 8% (November) to 24% (July) higher
(DOE/NETL 2009)
 Boyd and Ibarraran 2009 evaluate drought
scenarios in Mexico and find that in 2026
generation output declines -2.1% but with

29. LIMITED STUDIES FOR
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Only a couple of studies of the impacts of
climate change and extreme weather in
developing countries
 Lucena et al. 2010 model reduced hydropower from
altered rainfall and rising temps that affect thermal
efficiency and energy demand
 CCEWE lead to needing an addition 153 to 162 TWh of
electricity per year
 Capital investment needed to cover generation amounts to
$48 to $51 billion … equivalent to 10 years of capital
expenditures in Brazil’s long-term energy plan
 An additional ~$7 billion per year also needed for operating
expenses
 Boyd and Ibarraran 2009 evaluate drought
scenarios in Mexico and find that in 2026
generation output declines -2.1% but with
adaptation can increase by 0.24%

30. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS
CC: mostly affects the resource base of
renewables
CC: the impacts on thermal and rest of supply
chain are not severe
CC + EWE: the impacts can be severe
throughout energy supply chain
 Although nuclear is generally resilient, the safety concerns
posed by EWEs must be taken seriously
The costs of CC + EWE have not been
adequately evaluated, particularly EWEs
 The limited studies on EWEs suggest that impacts can be
significant
 Few studies have been done on the CC + EWE impacts on the

31. LOOKING AHEAD
IAEA has begun a coordinated research project with
institutions in:
 Argentina
 Cuba
 Egypt
 China
 Ghana
 Pakistan
 Slovenia
 Sudan
Goal of the research is to identify vulnerabilities of
energy infrastructure in each country as well as cost-
effective adaptation options

32. THANK YOU!
Eric Williams
eric.lee.williams@gmail.com

33. EXTRA SLIDES

37. Study
Model
Type Climate Impacts Modeled Energy/Economic Impacts
Regi
ons
Sect
ors
Stud
ied
Bosello et
al. 2009 IAM
Rising temperatures/ changing demand for
energy; impacts from 4 other sectors/events
(Global, 2001 - 2050)
Change in GDP in 2050 due to rising temperatures and
changing energy demand: 0% to 0.75% (+1.2°C); -0.1% to
1.2% (+3.1°C) 14 4
Jorgenso
n et al.
2004 CGE
Rising temperatures/ changing demand for
energy; climate impacts from 3 other sectors
(USA, 2000 - 2100)
Optimistic adaptation: 4% to 6.7% higher energy
productivity per year (2000 – 2100); Output from
electricity: -6% in 2050; GDP is +0.7% (aggregate all
sectors, avg annual 2000 – 2100)
Pessimistic adaptation: 0.5% to 2.2% lower energy
productivity per year; Output from electricity: +2% in 2050;
GDP is -0.6% (aggregate impact all sectors) 1 35
Bosello et
al. 2007 CGE
Rising temperatures/ changing demand for
energy (Global, 2050)
Change in GDP in 2050 (perfect competition): -0.297% to
0.027%;
Change in GDP in 2050 (imperfect competition): -0.303% to
0.027% 8 1
Aaheim
et al.
2009 CGE
Change in precipitation -> share of hydro power;
rising temperatures/ changing demand for
energy ; impacts from 4 other sectors (Western
Europe, 2071 – 2100)
Impact from all sectors in 2100: GDP in cooler regions: -1%
to -0.25%
GDP in warmer regions: -3% to -0.5%
Adaptation can mitigate 80% to 85% of economic impact 8 11
Generation output in 2026: -2.1%
Refining output: -10.1%
Coal output: -7.8%
NG output: -2%
Crude oil output: +1.7%
GDP: -3%
With adaptation:
Generation output in 2026: 0.24%%
Refining output: 1.36%%
Coal output: 1.09%%