Moving Multi-Pollutant Planning Forward

1. Moving Multi-Pollutant Planning Forward Jason Rudokas EAG Meeting June 11, 2010

2. Planning Challenges for Coming Decade • We have achieved great success in dramatically reducing emissions of lead, CO, ozone & acid rain • These successes are tempered by: • the growing understanding of environmental & public health threats posed by microscopic particles & greenhouse gases • awareness of impacts of cumulative exposures and synergistic effects • potential for exacerbating one problem while addressing another • GHG agenda implies virtual elimination of air pollutants associated with combustion

3. Planning Needs for the Coming Decade • Move to holistic multi-pollutant planning approach • Simultaneously meet short- and long-term objectives (e.g. air quality and climate) • Account for potential trade-offs • Expand scope to include social and economic considerations

4. Our Definition of Multi-Pollutant Planning • Addresses multiple pollutants, including SO2, NOX, CO2, and Hg • Highlights tradeoffs and co-benefits of policy options • Analyzes the environmental, public health, economic, & energy implications of various pollution control strategies • Allows for multi-sector analyses

5. Multi-Pollutant Planning Makes Sense • Strategies & technologies that reduce GHGs can also reduce traditional pollutants • Can help design cost-effective approaches that minimize burden on industry & maximize the use of state resources • Can result in better environmental results at lower cost • Promotes integrated energy & air quality planning

6. This is a New Planning Paradigm Is a broader, longer term multi-pollutant planning process from which multiple SIPs and plans can be developed The SIP is no longer the sole driver, but one of several drivers and derivative products Requires working with/aligning multiple state offices in joint data development and planning to identify solutions that meet multiple needs 6

7. Proof of Concept for NESCAUM’s Multi-Pollutant Policy Analysis Framework • NESCAUM has developed NE-MARKAL that covers region from DC to Maine • MARKAL is a least-cost optimization linear programming model that focuses on energy systems & technologies • Linked to atmospheric dispersion, macro-economic, & public health assessment models

8. NESCAUM’s Multi-Pollutant Policy Analysis Framework Goals & Policies emissions NE-MARKAL Energy Model Evolution of Energy System CMAQ Air Quality Model BenMAP Health Benefits Assessment expenditures Ambient Concentrations 12-State REMI Economic Model Wet/Dry Deposition Health Effects Incidence and Cost/Benefit Key Economic Indicators

9. Scale and Scopeof NESCAUM’s MPAF tool • Regional Integrated Assessment: 12 state-level models linked into a regional framework (never been done regionally outside EU) • State-level Planning: analytical tools are based on individual states • Individual Regulations: bottom-up approach ties model results directly to regulatory specifications

10. NE-MARKAL: Energy & Technology Model Oil Refining &Processing Automobiles Fossil Fuels Gasification Combustion Residential Biomass H2 Generation Uranium Nuclear Power Commercial Industry Carbon Sequestration Renewable Resources CleanEnergy Evolution of Today’s Energy System Industry Source: EPA ORD

11. The following results are preliminary, and are intended only to illustrate model capabilities.

12. State RPS: 25% by 2013 Reference Power Sector Generation Mix RPS Power Sector Generation Mix by Fuel Type by Fuel Type Annual Average Growth Rate between 2007 and 2030 (RPS) Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite

13. State RPS: 25% by 2013 Power Sector Cost Breakout Net Generation Change 2007-2030 Relative to Reference Power Sector Emissions Changes Net Capacity Change 2007-2030 Relative to Reference Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite

14. 60% of LDV fleet to electric vehicle by 2029 LDV Technology Deployment - Reference LDV Technology Deployment - EV by Vehicle Category by Vehicle Category Time Integrated Change between 2007 and 2030 14 Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite

15. 60% of LDV fleet to electric vehicle by 2029 LDV Transportation Sector Cost Breakout LDV Transportation Sector Emissions Changes 15 Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite

16. 60% of LDV fleet to electric vehicle by 2029 Electricity Generation by Fuel Type Reference Case EV 16 Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite

17. NE-MARKAL Brings it All Together • RPS (currently use IPM?) • EV (currently use MOBILE or MOVES + IPM?) • What about a “Combination Run”? • 25% RPS by 2013 • 25% fleet EV by 2030 • 25% fleet Hybrid by 2030 • + Energy Efficiency • + CHP • + Low Sulfur Fuel

18. Analysis of a large EV program would provide detailed information on vehicle technologies, fuel use, and emissions. A follow-up analysis could analyze the power sector impacts This could be done with tools like MOBILE or MOVES in combination with IPM or other power sector models RPS analysis provides detailed power sector information on technology deployment, costs, and emission impacts. This could be done with tools like IPM or other power sector models NE-MARKAL Brings it All Together: 2007-2030 Cumulative Emissions Reductions Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite Electric Sector + Transportation Sector + R/C/I Sector Net Emission Impact

19. Analysis of a large EV program would provide detailed information on vehicle technologies, fuel use, and emissions. A follow-up analysis could analyze the power sector impacts Transportation sector costs CAN NOT be examined with tools like MOBILE or MOVES or with IPM or other power sector models RPS analysis provides detailed power sector information on technology deployment, costs, and emission impacts. This could be done with tools like IPM or other power sector models NE-MARKAL Brings it All Together: 2007-2030 Cumulative Costs/Savings Preliminary Results – Draft – Do not quote or cite Electric Sector + Transportation Sector + R/C/I Sector Net Cost Impact

20. NE-MARKAL: Evolution of Energy System Oil Refining &Processing Technology Costs Automobiles Fossil Fuels Gasification Combustion Residential Biomass H2 Generation Multi-sector Emissions; (cross-sector emissions tradeoffs) New Power Infrastructure Uranium Nuclear Power Commercial Fuel Savings Industry Carbon Sequestration Renewable Resources Upstream Emissions CleanEnergy Evolution of Today’s Energy System Industry Source: EPA ORD Entire Emissions $

21. Many Potential Products Goals & Policies emissions NE-MARKAL Energy Model Evolution of Energy System CMAQ Air Quality Model BenMAP Health Benefits Assessment expenditures Climate Action Plan Ambient Concentrations 12-State REMI Economic Model Ozone SIP Wet/Dry Deposition Health Effects Incidence and Cost/Benefit Economic Plans Acid Dep Plan IRP Key Economic Indicators AQMP PM2.5 SIP Hg Plan NOx/SO2 2ndary Std Haze,etc.

22. How to Move Forward? • As states? • As a region? • Partnering with EPA? • Other? The time is ripe to proceed, given the current landscape (e.g., EPA administration, new NAAQS, federal and states’ climate goals)

23. THANK YOU