Energy & Greenhouse Gas Solutions
Mission: To provide rigorous and timely information to decision-makers and the public regarding energy and greenhouse gas related policy in Hawaii and beyond.
The Energy and Greenhouse Gas Solutions research program (EGGS) was launched in 2007 by the University of Hawai‘i Economic Research Organization (UHERO). It serves as a resource for those interested in issues of energy and greenhouse gas emissions reduction in Hawaii and beyond. EGGS takes a transdisciplinary approach to research by bringing together economists, planners, engineers and system modeling experts to address urgent issues of energy and climate change mitigation.
EGGS Core Goals
- 1. Engage in rigorous analysis that contributes to a global community of scholars.
- 2. Develop and maintain data and models on Hawai‘i’s energy, economy, and resulting greenhouse gas emissions.
- 3. Develop solution-oriented analyses for decision-makers and energy-related stakeholders.
- 4. Design interactive education and outreach programs for a variety of audiences.
- 5. Showcase Hawai‘i-based energy policy solutions that may benefit other jurisdictions, including other States, the U.S., and island areas.
- January 4, 2016 A Status Update on Federal GHG Emissions Reduction Policy for Hawaii
In early August, President Obama announced and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the final details for the Clean Power Plan (CPP). These rules are designed to lower levels of carbon pollution from existing U.S. power plants – aiming to curb U.S. electric sector emissions by 32% from 2005 levels by 2030 (EPA, 2015a). The CPP is an important first step in making good on the U.S.’s global commitment to reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26% below 2005 levels by the year 2025*.
Under the CPP, states have been given the choice of meeting either a rate- or mass-based goal for their existing fleet of power plants. In the draft version of the CPP, Hawaii was given a goal of reducing its emissions rate to 1,306 pounds of CO2 per MWh by 2030 (Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 2014). This target included energy efficiency gains and, given Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standard goal of 100% renewable sources for net electricity sales by 2045 (and 40% by 2030), the CPP target was almost certainly achievable. Our modeling of Hawaii’s electric sector suggests that it was cost-effective to go beyond this draft target, even without factoring in energy efficiency.
Yet, Hawaii is not included in the last version of the CPP. Between the draft and final, the EPA based its decision on a continental grid-based modeling approach (EPA, 2015b). As such, non-contiguous regions are currently left without regulation. The EPA states that further regulations will be developed, though no timeline for completion has been given (EPA, 2015b). In addition, Hawaii is excluded from generating potentially valuable emission rate credits (ERCs), even if a target is determined in the future. The CPP regulations state that the “resources must be connected to, and deliver energy to or save electricity on, the electric grid in the contiguous United States.” This regulation unnecessarily excludes Hawaii (and Alaska and Puerto Rico) for geographic reasons, when economic markets do not have to be geographically bound.
One of the ways that the federal programs will regulate GHGs is to limit future coal-fired power. The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the construction and operation of new power plants will effectively prohibit new coal units (without carbon capture) from coming online in the U.S., including Hawaii (Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 2014). This of course is a positive outcome in terms of limiting future emissions and most relevant to coal-intensive states. In Hawaii, limiting new coal is something that the Hawaiian Electric Companies voluntarily agreed to in 2008. The NSPS makes this official**.
In sum, the EPA’s recent actions toward GHG emissions is important at the national scale but will have limited to no impact on Hawaii.
*This commitment was made in 2014 between President Obama and China’s President Xi Jinping, representing the world’s two largest GHG polluters. China committed to peaking its carbon emissions around the year 2030 and to increase the share of non-fossil fuel energy consumption to about 20% by 2030 (Office of the Press Secretary, 2014).
**Oil-burning units in Hawaii are excluded from regulation under the NSPS (Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 2014).
Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 78 Fed. Reg. 34830 (proposed June 18, 2014) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R pt. 60). Available here
Office of the Press Secretary, 2014. Fact Sheet: U.S.-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change and Clean Energy Cooperation. Available here
Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 70 Fed. Reg. 1430 (proposed January 8, 2014) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R pts. 60, 70, 71, and 98). Available here
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2015a. Fact Sheet: Clean Power Plan Overview.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2015b. Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units. Final Rule. Available here
- November 5, 2015 Research Driven Energy Policy
Hawaii is in the midst of transforming its electricity system into one with a lot more renewable energy. It’s an exciting time, but also a challenging one that is forcing the State to make tough decisions amid many uncertainties. There appears to be confusion about who bears responsibility for making these decisions. Take, for example, public discussion surrounding the potential merger of HECO and NextEra, which has focused at times on whether NextEra can be trusted to keep their commitments to meeting Hawaii’s clean energy goals. At face value, that discussion seems odd given the utility is regulated and obtains approval from the state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for important policy changes. Meeting clean energy goals is a statutory mandate or regulatory requirement, not HECO’s or NextEra’s “choice”.*
It is possible that these concerns arise from the fact that the State’s goals have escape clauses. The Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), for example, includes a long list of reasons why the utility can be allowed to fall short of prescribed targets, including the cost of achieving the goals. Clearly, there are many ways the State might achieve its renewable energy goals, and the path we choose will have many consequences—for the cost of electricity, how the burden of those costs are allocated, how much energy we use, and the environmental impacts. Regardless of how the PUC decides the merger case, it is their job to ensure that the State’s goals are met in a cost effective manner.
Regardless of who owns the electric utility, given the pace and scale of changes to our electric system, there has to be a better way to fully utilize our local academic resources as we take on this formidable energy transformation. We need a mechanism for the utility, the PUC and other entities to engage in collaborative processes that results in an effective strategy befitting of the state’s multifaceted goals. These should include rigorous and transparent analysis of a wide range of policy alternatives from neutral parties.
We believe UHERO, as an objective data and research driven entity, can play a role in achieving the State’s clean energy goals and the need to lower and stabilize the cost of electricity. Several UHERO faculty and fellows have recently joined forces to form the Energy Policy and Planning Group. You may have seen some of the many blog posts or working papers we have released over the past year. A few things stand out from this line of research. First, is the merely obvious, reducing the cost of electricity in Hawaii can have significant impacts on our economy. Makena Coffman’s research showed that a 25% reduction in the price of electricity could raise Hawaii GDP by close to 1.5%. Moreover, focusing on making the business of contracting and pricing more efficient to get the incentives right is likely to create economic development opportunities through innovation in the production, delivery and use of energy.
Demand shifting is another active area of work that was discussed in some detail in "Efficient Design of Net Metering Agreements in Hawaii and Beyond" by Makena Coffman, Michael Roberts, Mathias Fripp, and Nori Tarui. This paper lays out several policy goals that are achievable in the near term, and some longer term goals. For example, Coffman et. al recommend an optional tariff, available for all customer classes, with hourly prices that reflect the continuous variation in supply and demand of electricity. In that way, customers will have incentives to reduce their use during times of high marginal cost (high loads with low renewable power production) and increase their demand during times of low marginal cost (low loads and/or high renewable power production). Customers who are able to shift demand will reduce their own costs and the system’s costs. And, variable pricing will open the door even wider to storage and related innovations. Such variable pricing will require smart meters, and HECO has already filed with the PUC to install smart meters.
There are thoughtful ways of incrementally modernizing the grid in a way that also facilitates customer choice. At first, smart meters need only be installed for households most willing to juggle variable pricing. Well-designed experimental pilots can be used to measure efficacy and guide future policies. To implement these policies it is imperative that the PUC possess the capacity to analyze the technical and economic merits of proposals or issues to be deliberated. UHERO faculty and fellows have been working on building such capabilities for several years. For example Matthias Fripp’s open source SWITCH model allows optimization of investment and electric system operation decisions to study alternative pathways to extremely high penetration renewables. And the UHERO electric sector model is tied to our General Equilibrium Model to translate energy systems decisions into economic outcomes.
We recommend using UHERO’s Energy Policy & Planning Group as a neutral, research-driven evaluator to model and analyze Hawaii’s energy policy. This role could be modeled after the role of the UH Hawaii Natural Energy Institute as a neutral evaluator of energy technology, or it could be less formal.
- October 19, 2015 Does PV Add Home Value?
Circuits with installed PV up to and greater than 250% of daytime minimum load. Source: HECO
Hawaii leads the nation with the highest per capita installation of solar photovoltaic (PV). High electricity rates—three times the national average, —a generous state tax credit, plummeting PV costs, and net energy metering (NEM) policy have all contributed to the proliferation of PV. Considering future cost savings, PV is an attractive investment, yielding an internal rate of return of 23% with the state tax credit, equivalent to a payback period of four years (Coffman et al., 2016). In a recent analysis I answer the question of how PV is capitalized into a home’s value.
Using econometric tools, I assess the impact of PV systems on home value for single-family resale homes on Oahu. Using home resale and PV building permit data from 2000-2013, I find that PV adds on average 5.4% to the value of a home. This translates to approximately $34,000 relative to the sales price of the median non-PV home of $630,000.
This means that PV already installed on a home is worth about $4,000 more than the median value of a PV permit (approximately $30,000). While this may appear puzzling at first, issues of circuit saturation may well-explain this result. Calculating the stream of electricity savings* over 9 years (the average household tenure) and a typical 30-year mortgage respectively, reveals that a homebuyer is effectively paying $4,000 more for a PV home to receive between $14,000- 30,000 in electricity savings. This makes sense given many of the circuits in Hawaii have reached legal limits for PV installations and therefore new homebuyers have an expectation that future installations will be limited. Thus for many the choice isn’t purchasing a house without PV (and then installing it) but rather to gain access to PV (and future electricity savings).
An area of further inquiry in light of the recent PUC ruling is to extend the dataset to examine whether homes that are grandfathered under the NEM program are worth more.
Coffman, M., Wee, S., Bonham, C., and Salim, G. (2016). “A Policy Analysis of Hawaii’s Solar Tax Credit Incentive.” Renewable Energy, 85, 1036-1043.*The net present value calculation assumes a 5% discount rate, electricity price of 30 cents/kWh, a system cost of $4.50/watt (year 2013), 5.2 solar hours per day, 75% efficiency factor, and daily household consumption of 18 kWh.
- July 20, 2015 Net Metering Agreements in Hawaii
In Hawaii, like most U.S. states, households installing rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) systems receive special pricing under net-metering agreements. These agreements allow households with rooftop solar to buy and sell electricity at the retail rate, effectively using the larger grid to store surplus generation from their panels during sunny times and use it when the sun isn’t shining. If a household generates more electricity than it consumes over the course of a month, it obtains a credit that rolls over for use in future months. Net generation supplied to the grid in excess of that consumed over the course of a full year is forfeited to the utility. Net metering agreements often include a monthly fee to support billing, transmission and operation of the grid.
A growing concern is that the utility has many costs besides the fuel used in electricity generation, and most of these “fixed costs” are lumped in with per- kilowatt hour (kWh) charges. As a result, under current net metering agreements, when a solar customer provides their own power, they don’t pay the fixed- cost component for each kWh they produce. Under a revenue-decoupling rule, those costs are shifted to households and businesses without rooftop solar. As less power is sold in Hawaii, fixed costs per kWh are rising fast. Most of the decrease in power sales is due to gains in efficiency, but some of it is due to installations of solar PV. Residential customers now pay roughly $0.17/kWh for fixed costs. After the drop in oil prices earlier this year, well over half the utility’s revenue from residential customers goes toward fixed costs.
The graph shows the average residential electricity price from 2000 to the present, and breaks out the generation component from the total (Adjusted ECAF). The difference between price and the Adjusted ECAF (Gap) accounts for all non-fuel or fixed costs.
A longer-term concern, particularly in Hawaii with its high electricity rates, is that an inefficient pricing system could encourage many households and businesses to install stand-alone systems, unplug from the grid, and further raise costs for everyone else.
In a new report UHERO's Energy Policy & Planning Group summarizes the benefits and challenges with distributed solar and sketch out a set of long-term solutions based on marginal-cost pricing as the primary platform. Marginal cost is the incremental cost of power production—the cost of generating one more kWh. This cost can vary a lot depending on total demand and the amount of renewable power, among other things, so ideal prices would vary over the course of each day, week, season and year. This is likely to become especially pronounced as the variable supply from renewable sources becomes more prominent.
- January 22, 2015 Up to $100 Million in Monthly Electricity Savings for Hawai’i After Oil Prices Plummet
As of January 12, the Brent Crude Price was just a shade under $47 per barrel. The last time prices were this low was nearly 5 years ago, in April, 2009. Since crude oil and its products feed into about
90%70% of electricity generated in Hawai’i, it is almost axiomatic to expect electricity prices to decline with oil prices.
But it takes some time for oil prices to feed into electricity prices. The price Hawaiian Electric Industries pays for oil in any month is closely connected to the average Brent crude price in the three previous months (figure 1). So, if prices stay this low, it will take up to four months before electricity prices fully reflect the drop in oil prices.
The relationship between the lagged average oil price and electricity price implies that each dollar per barrel decline in oil price should lead to a 0.22 cents/kWh decline in electricity price (figure 2). We use this relationship to project electricity prices under two assumptions about the future price of oil: (i) oil prices remain constant at the January 12 level, or (ii) oil prices follow the path predicted by the January 12 futures prices for Brent crude. (Futures prices are prices that can be locked in today for delivery up to 5 years from now).
Figure 3 shows these projections. Assuming oil prices stay at current prices, electricity prices should decline to around 18 cents/kWh by the middle of the year, and stay there. As of January 12, futures prices are above spot prices, so the second scenario has electricity prices falling to 18 cents/kWh but then gradually increasing to 23 cents/kwh thereafter.
Note that this forecast is based on the historical link between oil prices and electricity. In recent years electricity prices have drifted above this relationship, so it’s possible that prices will not drop as much as we project even if oil prices stay low.
Either way, the savings will be substantial. For a household consuming 600kWh, the 10 to 15 cent/kWh decline translates into $60 to $90 off their monthly bill. Since Hawai`i is consuming 790GWh on average, the almost $60 decline in oil prices should save the State’s economy about $104 million every month, with about three quarters of that amount going to businesses and municipalities and a quarter of it going to households.
With Hawai’i being the most oil-dependent state in the country, plus that fact that we import all of our oil, our state may benefit more than any other from the precipitous decline in oil prices.
- Karl Jandoc and Michael Roberts