Research

Canadian and North American Analysis

EPRI's Energy System and Climate Analysis group has made substantial updates to the Regional Economy, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy (REGEN) framework to create the North American REGEN model, which includes a detailed capacity expansion and dispatch model of the electric sector and dynamic energy end-use model to project the end-use dynamics that affect electric and energy demand and electrification in both the U.S. and Canada. The new model allows EPRI to conduct analysis of the inter-related dynamics of emissions reduction policies, electrification, and technology development and capture impacts across U.S. and Canadian borders. Potential insights include the value and challenges of emerging technologies, climate policies, cross-border trade, inter-regional transmission, as well as climate resiliency, reliability, and changing end-use demand, among others.

In 2021, EPRI released the Canadian National Electrification Assessment, which explores the results of Canadian electrification pathways to meet national 2050 greenhouse gas targets on emissions, energy prices, generation capacity mix, load shapes and energy demand. This national assessment has laid the groundwork for more detailed analysis of provincial decarbonization pathways as well as further investigation of the drivers and potential uncertainties around these decarbonization pathways.

Contact Chris Roney for more information about EPRI’s Canadian energy-economic analyses.

EPRI Reports
Product ID Name Published Type
3002021160 Canadian National Electrification Assessment – English September 2021 Technical Report
3002022642 Canadian National Electrification Assessment – French September 2021 Technical Report

Canada REGEN Model Documentation

Product ID Name Published Type
3002022099 Canada REGEN Model Documentation June 2021 Technical Update

Articles/Other Reports

Name Author Published
Deep decarbonization impacts on electric load shapes and peak demand John Bistline, Chris Roney, David McCollum, Geoffrey Blanford September 2021
Insights for Canadian electricity generation planning from an integrated assessment model: Should we be more cautious about hydropower cost overruns? E. Arbuckle, M. Binsted, E. Davies, D. Chiappori, Christopher Roney, et al. March 2021
Electric sector impacts of renewable policy coordination: A multi-model study of the North American energy system John Bistline, M. Brown, S. Siddiqui, K. Vaillancourt October 2020
Key findings from the core North American scenarios in the EMF34 intermodel comparison H. Huntington, A. Bhargava, D. Daniels, J. Weyant, John Bistline, et al. September 2020

US Energy Systems and Climate Analysis

In 2007 EPRI released its first Prism and MERGE analyses. These analyses outlined technically and economically feasible scenarios for the electricity sector to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions over the next few decades. The Prism analysis provided a comprehensive assessment of potential CO2 reductions in eight key technology areas of the electricity sector. The MERGE analysis identified cost-effective technology portfolios over time in response to a given CO2 emissions constraint. Both analyses have been cited in numerous national and international publications and provided thought leadership for the electric power industry.

In 2009 EPRI initiated a multi-year effort to develop a U.S. energy-economic model to assess the impact of environmental, energy, and climate policies on the electric power sector, the energy system, and the economy overall at both regional and national scales. The U.S. Regional Economy, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy (US-REGEN) model includes a technologically detailed capacity expansion model of the U.S. electric sector. This model has seen extensive use, in analyzing the impacts of the Environmental Protection Agency's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), and the CO2 performance standards for new and existing units, in analyzing the evolution of the electric sector under deep penetration of renewables and the economics of storage technologies, and to assess the impacts of renewable portfolio and clean energy standards.

In 2018 EPRI added a technologically detailed energy end-use module to the US-REGEN model, which, in iteration with the electric sector model, helps to improve our understanding of the economics of electrification, and provides insights on the trade-offs between electric and non-electric sector decarbonization. This model was used to support EPRI's U.S. National Electrification Assessment, and subsequent state-level assessments in 14 U.S. states.

Research Summaries

Links will open in a new window/tab.

ESCA maintains a series of research summaries that provide a list of all ESCA research related to a particular topic. Web links are included where available. Publications marked with an * are available to the public free of charge or are published in academic journals. Other publications are available to EPRI member companies, as indicated by the program number in brackets preceding the publication. The research summaries are organized by topic and by date and are updated several times a year.

Product ID Name Updated
3002018264 Value, costs and impacts of renewable generation April 2020
3002018266 Value, costs, and impacts of electricity storage technologies April 2020
3002018270 Value and costs of nuclear generation April 2020
3002018261 Greenhouse gas emissions accounting March 2020
3002018263 Greenhouse gas emissions offsets March 2020
EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002022791 Incorporating Solar PV and Electric Vehicles into Electric Company Resource Planning 27-Sep-2021 Technical Brief
3002022395 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Accounting for Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) 09-Sep-2021 Technical Brief
3002022366 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Accounting for Electric Companies: A Compendium of Technical Briefing Papers and Frequently Asked Questions 08-Sep-2021 Technical Update
3002021969 Incorporating Energy Storage Resources into Long-Term Capacity Planning Models: An Assessment of the Inclusion of Specific Features on Battery Deployment in the Southeastern United States 30-Jun-2021 Technical Update
3002020700 Powering Decarbonization: Strategies for Net-Zero CO2 Emissions 23-Feb-2021 White Paper
3002020121 Analyzing Federal Clean Energy Standards: Policy Design Choices and Future Electric Power Sector Outcomes 05-Feb-2021 Technical Brief
3002019986 Economic, System, and Environmental Implications of High Renewables in the Western U.S. 11-Jan-2021 Technical Results
3002019860 Georgia-Alabama Efficient Electrification Energy System Assessment: Executive Summary 18-Sep-2020 Technical Brief
3002019494 Efficient Electrification in California: Assessment of Energy System and Air Quality Impacts 21-May-2020 Technical Report
3002019327 Electrification Scenarios for North Carolina's Energy Future: Executive Summary 15-Apr-2020 Technical Update
3002017940 Electrification Scenarios for New York's Energy Future 27-Feb-2020 Technical Report
3002015044 Methods to Account for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Embedded in Wholesale Power Purchases 25-Mar-2019 Technical Results
3002015555 Electric Generation Investments Under Climate Policy Uncertainty 15-Mar-2019 Technical Results
3002015420 Cost-Effectively Achieving Carbon Goals in Minnesota: Renewable Standards vs. Technology-Neutral Policies — A scenario-based analysis of electric-sector impacts through 2050 07-Mar-2019 Technical Results
3002013582 U.S. National Electrification Assessment 02-Apr-2018 Technical Results
3002011803 Exploring the Role of Advanced Nuclear in Future Energy Markets: Economic Drivers, Barriers, and Impacts in the United States 08-Mar-2018 Technical Results
3002012171 Value of Technology in the Electric Power Sector: Modeling and Insights in US-REGEN 18-Dec-2017 Technical Update
3002011365 Systems Analysis in Electric Power Sector Modeling: Evaluating Model Complexity for Long-Range Planning 17-Oct-2017 Technical Results
3002011102 Systems Analysis in Electric Power Sector Modeling: A Review of the Recent Literature and Capabilities of Selected Capacity Planning Tools 05-Jun-2017 Technical Results
3002007497 Where Has "When" Flexibility Gone? The Role of Temporal Flexibility in Achieving Greenhouse Gas Abatement Goals 27-Jun-2016 Technical Results
3002008864 Interactions Between Power Markets and Emissions Trading: A Simple Example 20-Jun-2016 Technical Update
3002008653 Simulating Annual Variation in Load, Wind, and Solar by Representative Hour Selection 9-Jun-2016 Technical Update
3002008242 Technical and Economic Challenges of Flexible Operations: Case Studies of California and Texas 28-Mar-2016 Technical Results
3002006517 Program on Technology Innovation: Fossil Fleet Transition with Fuel Changes and Large Scale Variable Renewable Integration 02-Oct-2015 Technical Results
3002002333 Implications of a New Source Performance Standard for New Fossil Generation: A High-Level Bounding Analysis Based on the US-REGEN Model 27-Nov-2013 Technical Update
1026743 PRISM 2.0 The Value of Innovation in Environmental Controls 3-Oct-2012 Technical Report
Articles / Other Reports

John Bistline, Chris Roney, David, McCollum, and Geoff Blanford (2021): “Deep Decarbonization Impacts on Electric Load Shapes and Peak Demand” (Environmental Research Letters)

Young, D; Bistline, JET; Cole, W; Mai, T. 2021. The Outlook for Wind and Solar Deployment: Drivers and Constraints. Published in EM Magazine, a copyrighted publication of the Air & Waste Management Association, May 2021.

Cole, W; Mai, T; Bistline, JET; Young, D. 2021. The Current State of Renewable Energy for Electricity. Published in EM Magazine, a copyrighted publication of the Air & Waste Management Association, May 2021.

John Bistline (2021): "The Importance of Temporal Resolution in Modeling Deep Decarbonization of the Electric Power Sector" (Environmental Research Letters)

John Bistline, Geoff Blanford, Trieu Mai, James Merrick (2021): "Modeling Variable Renewable Energy and Storage in the Power Sector" (Energy Policy)

John Bistline, Geoff Blanford (2021): “Impact of Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies on Deep Decarbonization of the Electric Power Sector" (Nature Communications)

John Bistline (2021): "Variability in Deeply Decarbonized Electricity Systems" (Environmental Science & Technology)

James Edmonds (PNNL), Christopher Nichols (NETL), Misha Adamantiades (U.S. EPA), John Bistline, Jonathan Huster (PNNL), Gokul Iyer (PNNL), Nils Johnson, Pralit Patel (PNNL), Sharon Showalter (OnLocation), Nadja Victor (NETL), Stephanie Waldhoff (PNNL), Marshal Wise (PNNL) and Frances Wood (OnLocation) (2020): Could congressionally mandated incentives lead to deployment of large-scale CO2 capture, facilities for enhanced oil recovery CO2 markets and geologic CO2 storage? (Energy Policy)

John Bistline, Wesley Cole (NREL), Giovanni Damato, Joseph DeCarolis (NC State University), Will Frazier (NREL), Vikram Linga (EIA), Cara Marcy (EPA), Chris Namovicz (EIA), Kara Podkaminer (DOE), Ryan Sims5, Manussawee Sukunta (EIA) and David Young (2020): "Energy storage in long-term system models: a review of considerations, best practices, and research needs" (Progress in Energy)

John Bistline, Maxwell Brown (NREL), Sauleh Siddiqui (American University), Kathleen Vaillancourt (Esmia Consultants) (2020): "Electric Sector Impacts of Renewable Policy Coordination: A Multi-Model Study of the North American Energy System" (Energy Policy)

John Bistline, James Merrick, Victor Niemeyer (2020): "Estimating Power Sector Leakage Risks and Provincial Impacts of Canadian Carbon Pricing" (Environmental and Resource Economics)

John Bistline, David Young (2020): "Emissions Impacts of Future Battery Storage Deployment on Regional Power Systems" (Applied Energy)

John Bistline, Geoff Blanford (2020): "Value of Technology in the U.S. Electric Power Sector: Impacts of Full Portfolios and Technological Change on the Costs of Meeting Decarbonization Goals" (Energy Economics)

John Bistline, David Young (2019): "Economic drivers of wind and solar penetration in the US" (Environmental Research Letters)

John Bistline, Nidhi Santen, David Young (2019): "The Economic Geography of Variable Renewable Energy and Impacts of Trade Formulation for Renewable Mandates" (Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews)

John Bistline (2019): "Turn Down For What? The Economic Value of Operational Flexibility in Electricity Markets" (IEEE Transactions on Power Systems)

John Bistline, Elke Hodson (DOE), Charles Rossmann (Southern Company), Jared Creason (EPA), Brian Murray (Duke University), Alexander Barron (Smith College) (2018): "Electric Sector Policy, Technological Change, and U.S. Emissions Reductions Goals: Results from the EMF 32 Model Intercomparison Project" (Energy Economics)

Trieu Mai (NREL), John Bistline, Yinong Sun (NREL), Wesley Cole (NREL), Cara Marcy (EIA), Chris Namovicz (EIA), David Young (2018): "The role of input assumptions and model structures in projections of variable renewable energy: A multi-model perspective of the U.S. electricity system" (Energy Economics)

David Young, John Bistline (2018): "The Costs and Value of Renewable Portfolio Standards in Meeting Decarbonization Goals" (Energy Economics)

Geoff Blanford, James Merrick, John Bistline, and David Young (2018): "Simulating Annual Variation in Load, Wind, and Solar by Representative Hour Selection" (The Energy Journal)

Wesley Cole (NREL), Bethany Frew (NREL), Trieu Mai (NREL), Yinong Sun (NREL), John Bistline, Geoffrey Blanford, David Young, Cara Marcy (EIA), Chris Namovicz (EIA), Risa Edelman (EPA), Bill Meroney (EPA), Ryan Sims (EPA), Jeb Stenhouse (EPA), Paul Donohoo-Vallett (DOE) (2017): "Variable Renewable Energy in Long-Term Planning Models: A Multi-Model Perspective" (NREL Report 70528)

John Bistline and Francisco de la Chesnaye (2017): "Banking on Banking: Does ‘When’ Flexibility Mask the Costs of Stringent Climate Policy?" (Climatic Change).

John Bistline (2017): "Economic and Technical Challenges of Flexible Operations under Large-Scale Variable Renewable Deployment" (Energy Economics)

John Bistline and Geoff Blanford (2016): "More Than One Arrow in the Quiver: Why '100% Renewables' Misses the Mark" (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

Geoff Blanford, James Merrick, and David Young (2014): "A Clean Energy Standard Analysis with the US-REGEN Model" (The Energy Journal)

Social Costs of Climate Policy

International and domestic climate policies may cost on the order of trillions of dollars, but cost-effective implementation and technology advances can substantially reduce the cost of achieving the environmental objectives of these policies. EPRI's climate policy research provides members and public- and private-sector decision makers with analysis and information on the potential costs and benefits of global climate policy proposals.

EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002020523 Repairing the Social Cost of Carbon Framework: Immediate and One Year Steps for Scientifically Reliable Estimates and Use 05-Feb-2021 Technical Brief
3002020282 EPRI Comments on Moody's "Proposed framework to assess carbon transition risks for electric power companies 30-Dec-2020 Technical Update
3002020249 EPRI Public Comments on New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's Proposal "Establishing a Value of Carbon: Guidelines for Use by State Agencies 23-Dec-2020 Technical Update
3002011658 Social Cost of Carbon Pricing of Power Sector CO2: Accounting for Leakage and Other Social Implications from Subnational Policies – Discussion Paper 06-Sep-2017 Technical Report
3002004659 Applying the Social Cost of Carbon: Technical Considerations 20-Jul-2016 Technical Report
3002004657 Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Technical Assessment 20-Oct-2014 Technical Report
1015510 An Updated Macroeconomic Analysis of Recent California Climate Action Team Strategies 29-Oct-2007 Technical Report
1012577 Program on Technology Innovation: Managing the Risks of Climate Policies 20-Dec-2006 Technical Report
1013315 Interactions of Cost-Containment Measures and Linking of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap-and-Trade Programs 5-Dec-2006 Technical Update
Articles / Presentations

Links will open a PDF in a new window/tab.

Name Author Published Size
Webcast Presentation: Applying the Social Cost of Carbon: Technical Considerations PDF icon S. Rose September 2017 956 KB
Webcast Presentation: Social Cost of Carbon Pricing of Power Sector CO2 PDF icon S. Rose August 2017 3 MB
Webcast Presentation: Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study PDF icon S. Rose July 2017 3.7 MB
Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide National Academies of Sciences, et al. July 2017
Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study S. Rose May 2017
Climate Policy Implications and Opportunities for Nuclear Generation PDF icon V. Niemeyer January 2010 1.47 MB
Social Cost of Carbon Presentation for Environmental Defense Fund PDF icon S. Rose November 2010 909 KB
EPRI Webcast on Understanding Cost Estimates for the Waxman-Markey Legislation PDF icon T. Wilson July 2008 1.38 MB

GHG Offset Policy

In 2008, EPRI launched a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Offset Policy Dialogue project. The project informs key constituencies involved in the development of U.S. climate mitigation strategies and policies about GHG emissions offset-related policies and design issues and offers a forum for discussion.

EPRI research examines the role GHG emissions offsets can play in an electric company's carbon compliance strategy and how offsets offer a key contribution to meet global GHG emissions reduction targets quickly and at comparatively low cost. So-called project-based mechanisms use the power of markets to supply cost-efficient GHG emission reductions to entities that need to reduce emissions.

EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002000298 Exploring the Interaction between California’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap-and-Trade Program and Complementary Emissions Reduction Policies 04-Mar-2013 Technical Update
1023811 Overview of Subnational Programs to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation: (REDD) as Part of the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force 23-Jul-2012 Technical Update
1023662 "Blue Sky" Approaches to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Initial Assessment of Potential New Types of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offsets 22-Dec-2011 Technical Update
1023671 Case Studies of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offset Projects Implemented in the United Nations Clean Development Mechanism: Learning by Doing and Implications for a Future United States Offsets Program 21-Dec-2011 Technical Update
1023673 Designing a Large-Scale Federal Greenhouse Gas Offsets Program in the United States: Policy Choices and Lessons Learned from the Clean Development Mechanism and Other Offsets Programs 29-Nov-2011 Technical Update
1022180 Aggregation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offsets: Benefits, Existing Methods, and Key Challenges 31-Oct-2011 Technical Update
1023122 Key Institutional Design Considerations and Resources Required to Develop a Federal Greenhouse Gas Offsets Program in the United States 25-May-2011 Technical Update
1019910 Key Institutional Design Considerations and Resources Required to Develop a Federal Greenhouse Gas Offsets Program in the United States 21-Jun-2010 Technical Update
1017998 Key Issues in Designing Mechanisms to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) 13-Jul-2009 Technical Report
1015633 Key Issues in Developing and Using Project-Based GHG Offsets 23-Dec-2008 Technical Update
1014085 A Comprehensive Overview of Project-Based Mechanisms to Offset Greenhouse Gas Emissions 21-Dec-2007 Technical Update
1015463 Developing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offsets by Reducing Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Emissions in Agricultural Crop Production 30-Oct-2007 Technical Update
1012576 Guidance for Electric Companies on the Use of Forest Carbon Sequestration Projects to Offset Greenhouse Gas Emissions 7-Dec-2006 Technical Update
Articles / Presentations

Links will open a PDF in a new window/tab.

Name Author Published Size
Existing Barriers to Offsets Project & Market Development and Potential Approaches to Overcome Them A. Diamant March 2012 1.59 MB
Overview of the EPRI-MSU Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offsets Methodology A. Diamant October 2010 975 KB
EPRI GHG Emissions Offset Policy Dialogue Workshop #8: Offset Project Development and Approval Processes A. Diamant June 2010 2.36 MB
The Key Role of GHG Emissions Offsets in a U.S. CO2 Cap-and-Trade Program A. Diamant April 2010 777 KB
Climate Policy and Offsets Presentation at London Energy Forum T. Wilson November 2009 1138 KB
EPRI Board of Directors Learns How International Climate Policy May Shape U.S. Energy Future T. Wilson November 2009 687 KB
Forest Carbon Market Presentation at London Energy Forum S. Rose November 2009 1046 KB
EPRI Board of Directors Learns About Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offsets A. Diamant August 2009 709 KB
EPRI Webcast on the 5th GHG Emissions Offset Policy Dialogue A. Diamant June 2009 2.22 MB
Key Issues in Designing Mechanisms to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Deforestation & Degradation A. Diamant May 2009 195 KB

Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases

About EPRI

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is a nonprofit, scientific research and development organization with a public benefit mission. EPRI strives to advance knowledge and facilitate informed public discussion and decision-making.

EPRI SC-GHG Scientific Initiative

EPRI's social cost of greenhouse gases (SC-GHG) research is designed to inform public dialogue by evaluating and advancing the relevant sciences and educating the public and scientific community on technical issues related to SC-GHG estimation and use, and GHG valuation in general. Initiative activities include technical publications, educational outreach, and expert engagement. Stay informed: Please sign-up [here] if you would like to stay up to date on EPRI's SC-GHG research and forthcoming educational events.

Unique EPRI SC-GHG expertise and analyses

EPRI has been studying SC-GHG methodologies for over a dozen years, including examining in detail the models and assumptions that comprise the current Interagency Working Group framework (IWG Framework) current used by the U.S. Government. EPRI's research led to participation on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) SCC Committee, and EPRI's assessment of the IWG Framework was a key input into the NASEM SCC Committee study Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide.

EPRI also has long-standing recognized scientific expertise in climate scenarios, integrated assessment modeling, socioeconomic and energy system transformation, and climate policy evaluation, as well as an extensive history of research community leadership and participation in the NASEM, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the U.S. National Climate Assessment.

See EPRI SC-GHG Related Technical Resources below.

What is the social cost of carbon?

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary estimate of the damages from climate change from emitting a metric ton of carbon dioxide (CO2), and has been used in policy making and evaluation as an estimate of the benefit of reducing a metric ton of CO2. See examples in Rose and Bistline (2016).

What is the social cost of other greenhouse gases?

Per unit damage estimates have also been created for emissions of other greenhouse gases, including methane (SCM) and nitrous oxide (SCN). See examples in Waldhoff (2016).

Why are the social costs of greenhouse gases important?

The social costs of carbon, methane, and nitrous oxide, collectively referred to as the social costs of greenhouse gases (SC-GHG), are estimates of the potential damages to society from climate change resulting from GHG emissions and, therefore, represent one type of information relevant to climate decisions.

The SC-GHG estimates also have significant potential public and private financial and budgetary implications. Since 2007, the U.S. Government has been legally obligated to value changes in CO2. SC-GHG estimates represent one possible way to value GHGs, but not the only way. SCC estimates specifically have been applied by the U.S. Government dating back to 2008, with estimates for other GHGs applied more recently, and both types of estimates now being considered by some U.S. states and by other federal governments (e.g., Canada). See examples in Rose and Bistline (2016 ).

President Biden's Executive Order

On January 20, 2021, President Biden issued an [executive order] requesting interim SC-GHG estimates for carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in 30 days, and final estimates by January 2022, as well as recommendations on appropriate use of these estimates by September 1, 2021. These estimates would be used in all climate and energy related regulations, as well as considered for other federal decisions going forward in assessing proposals, justifying actions, and setting standards. The estimates will also be considered by states and other governments.

An Interagency Working Group Framework (IWG Framework) was initially developed in 2010 that generated estimates of the SCC and other GHGs for this purpose. This framework was used to generate estimates under the Obama and Trump Administrations, but with each treating the outputs differently. The same IWG Framework is now being used for the Biden Administration Interim SC-GHG estimates.

See Rose et al (2017) for detailed assessment of the IWG Framework and the underlying modeling, and EPRI (2021) for immediate opportunities to repair issues affecting scientifically reliability.

Establishing scientific reliability of SC-GHG estimates and use

Estimating the SC-GHGs is complicated, requiring a broad analytical scope that draws on many scientific disciplines and depends on a vast number of technical details. There are many technical intricacies and challenges needing to be communicated to the public and addressed for scientifically reliable estimates and use, and public confidence in the insights they provide and actions they inform.

For instance, with the need to model global economic and physical systems for centuries (Figure 1), SC-GHG estimates have been shown to be highly sensitive to assumptions about future society, climate system dynamics, and society's exposure and vulnerability, thus there are a broad range of estimates in the literature and scrutinizing models and assumptions is essential, as is accounting for uncertainties. For instance, detailed analysis of the inner-workings and assumptions of the current IWG SC-GHG Framework has identified fundamental technical issues with that framework relevant to the Biden Interim SC-GHG estimates.

Similarly, using SC-GHG estimates has been shown to pose an additional set of challenges that need to be addressed for conceptually and mechanically appropriate application in benefit-cost analyses and other contexts to ensure scientifically reliable policy insights.

Establishing scientifically reliable and robust estimates, and policy use of SC-GHG estimates, are essential for public confidence in their insights; this requires adequate transparency, justification, and review, which takes time, potentially more than a year for developing the final estimates President Biden seeks. Furthermore, establishing robustness of SC-GHG estimates will be challenging, and we may need to consider alternatives for meeting the legal requirement to value GHGs in rulemakings.

See EPRI (2021) for discussion of SC-GHG estimation and use challenges and needs, including appropriate scientific review, and Rose (2014) and Rose (2012) for examples of SC-GHG estimates and estimate sensitivity.

Figure 1. High-level depiction of the global and multi-century sequence of modeling required for computing estimates of the social costs of carbon and other greenhouse gases. To compute an SC-GHG estimate for emissions in a particular year (e.g., a social cost of carbon estimate for CO2 emissions in 2020), a pulse of emissions is applied in that year, producing a projected incremental change in climate and climate damages (dashed lines) relative to a projected reference condition (solid lines). An SC-GHG estimate is then calculated by aggregating the incremental damages over time using annual discount rates to compute the net present value SC-GHG. The large spatial and temporal modeling scope implies significant uncertainty and highlights the importance of accounting for uncertainties. Figure source: Rose et al (2017). Developed from Rose et (2014) and used by the NASEM (Cropper et al, 2017).

Understanding the current U.S. Government SC-GHG estimation framework

The current Interagency Working Group Framework (IWG Framework) is complex, using 150,000 scenarios to generate a single SC-GHG estimate from three models each run 50,000 times with different assumptions to project global society, climate, sea-level rise, and potential damages from climate change for 300 years. Thus, a single SC-GHG estimate is based on an enormous amount of aggregation and averaging—across countries, types of potential climate impacts, centuries, models, and tens of thousands of model runs with varying assumptions.

Understanding and evaluating how potential societal futures translate into projected emissions, emissions into climate change, and social/climate factors into specific climate damages, is impossible to discern without examining the details of the IWG Framework and the individual models and assumptions to see what, where, and when specific types of damage are projected. This requires detailed understanding and assessment of the modeling structure, assumptions, and behavior.

EPRI has conducted extensive analysis deconstructing and assessing the inner workings of the three IWG SC-GHG estimation models (DICE, FUND, and PAGE) and the overall multi-model IWG Framework used to produce the Biden Administration's "interim" estimates, as well as the Obama and Trump Administration estimates Rose et (2017); Rose et at, 2014). This research was a key input into the NASEM SCC Committee deliberations and informed the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) SCC Committee's studies (see below).

Rose et al (2017), an extension of the analysis in Rose et al (2014), provides (1) detailed tables on the structural elements of each component of the models used by the IWG Framework, and (2) experimental results isolating and elucidating model behavior within each component (socioeconomic, climate, regional climate, sea-level rise, and damages) for projections to the year 2100 and 2300, including intermediate calculations within components for reference and GHG emissions pulse responses, as well as deterministic and probabilistic results. Rose et al (2017) also discusses how the differences in models contribute to the significant differences in SC-GHG results between models and how the detailed insights into the modeling could be used to review the scientific reliability of models and assumptions to filter out indefensible elements. This research reveals stark differences in how the models represent individual components in SC-GHG calculations. It also finds fundamental technical issues with the individual models and the overall framework that affect the scientific reliability and robustness of the results.

See [IWG, 2021; IWG 2016; IWG, 2015] for the U.S. Government technical support documents associated with the Biden and Obama Administration's SC-GHG estimates. See Rose et al (2017) for insights into the unique behavior, and technical issues, of the individual models that impact each model's SC-GHG results. See EPRI (2021) for discussion of immediate opportunities for repairing the technical issues with the current IWG Framework, and challenges that need to be addressed for future updates.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine SCC Committee Studies

In 2015, the NASEM was asked by the U.S. Government to assemble a multi-disciplinary committee to examine potential approaches for future updates to the IWG Framework for SCC and other greenhouse gas estimation. EPRI's Steven Rose was a member of the SCC Committee, and EPRI's research was a key input into the NASEM SCC Committee deliberations, published reports, and recommendations. The resulting NASEM Phase 1 and 2 studies provided near-term and longer-term recommendations, including an overall recommendation to develop a new framework. The NASEM 2017 study is referenced in President Biden's Executive Order as a key methodological resource for developing updated SC-GHG estimates.

See Cropper et al (2016) and Cropper et al (2017) respectively for the NASEM SCC Committee's Phase 1 and Phase 2 studies.

EPRI SC-GHG Educational Webcast Series Materials

The series will consist of regular public educational webcasts with expert panels on scientific topics related to the SC-GHG estimation and use. The series is designed to facilitate understanding and discussion of the many technical issues and inform the development of SC-GHG estimates and applications.

Webcast 1: The social cost of carbon and other greenhouse gases – getting up to speed and the road ahead

EPRI hosted the first webcast in it’s Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases Education Webcast Serie on June 24, 2021. Following the Biden Administration’s recent publication of the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990, epri submitted comments on the interim estimates and on the document. Estimates of the social costs of greenhouse gases are important metrics currently being used to calculate the potential climate benefits associated with federal rules, and they are also applied in other federal and state contexts. The webcast panel featured:

  • Elizabeth Kopits, Senior Economist, National Center for Environmental Economics, USEPA
  • Maureen Cropper, Co-Chair of NASEM SCC Committee and Distinguished Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Maryland
  • Steven Rose, Senior Research Economist, Energy Systems & Climate Analysis, EPRI
  • Scott Weaver, Director, Air Quality Services, American Electric Power

The panel introduced the public to the social costs of carbon and other greenhouse gases and discussed the policy and scientific state of play and the road ahead. PDF’s of the presentations and the webcast recording can be found below.

Name Author Size
Introduction   502 KB
Overview of U.S. Government Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon and Other Greenhouse Gases Elizabeth Kopits 604 KB
Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide Maureen Cropper 658 KB
Scientific Challenges in Social Cost of Greenhouse Gas Estimation and Use Steven Rose 2.1 MB
Webcast Recording All

Integrated Assessment

Climate policies will fundamentally change the economics of electricity and energy, and smart policy approaches can substantially reduce the costs of meeting the environmental goals of these policies. EPRI conducts integrated assessments of potential costs and benefits of climate change management proposals and impacts on national and international economies. Within these analyses, the research illuminates the role of technology in achieving climate policy goals, with a specific emphasis on the electricity sector.

EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002014510 Grounding Decisions: A Scientific Foundation for Companies Considering Global Climate Scenarios and Greenhouse Gas Goals 05-Oct-2018 Technical Results
3002011658 Social Cost of Carbon Pricing of Power Sector CO2: Accounting for Leakage and Other Social Implications from Subnational Policies – Discussion Paper 06-Sep-2017 Technical Report
3002004659 Applying the Social Cost of Carbon: Technical Considerations 20-Jul-2016 Technical Report
3002004657 Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Technical Assessment 20-Oct-2014 Technical Report
Articles / Presentations
Name Author Published Size
Webcast recording: Grounding Decisions: A Scientific Foundation for Companies Considering Global Climate Scenarios and Greenhouse Gas Goals S. Rose October 18, 2018  
Webcast Presentation: Applying the Social Cost of Carbon: Technical Considerations PDF icon S. Rose September 2017 956 KB
Webcast Presentation: Social Cost of Carbon Pricing of Power Sector CO2 PDF icon S. Rose August 2017 3 MB
Webcast Presentation: Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study PDF icon S. Rose July 2017 3.7 MB
Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study S. Rose May 2017
Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide New window icon National Academies of Sciences, et al. July 2017
EPRI Board of Directors Learns How International Climate Policy May Shape U.S. Energy Future PDF icon T. Wilson November 2009 687 KB
Feasible Climate Targets PDF icon R. Richels June 2009 447 KB
International Emissions Scenarios: The Role of Developing Country Participation PDF icon G. Blanford March 2009 386 KB
Revised Emissions Growth Projections for China: Why Post-Kyoto Climate Policy Must Look East, Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements New window icon R. Richels, et al. September 2008  
Scenarios of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Atmospheric Concentrations, U.S. Climate Change Science Program PDF icon R. Richels, et al. July 2007 12.23 MB

Highlights

EPRI Reports

Review of 1.5°C & IEA Scenarios: Insights for Climate Risk Assessment & Goal Setting

Review of 1.5°C & IEA Scenarios: Insights for Climate Risk Assessment & Goal Setting

Evaluating low-carbon transition risk and setting goals is challenging. EPRI study and webcast enables grounded discussion & decisions by assessing global warming scenarios for 1.5°C and higher and deriving insights for companies & stakeholders.

Resources:

EPRI Study Provides a Technical Foundation for Company Climate Scenarios and Emissions Goals

EPRI completed a study analyzing and characterizing current scientific knowledge associated with developing and evaluating company climate policy scenario analyses and greenhouse gas emissions goals. The study identifies technical issues and insights relevant to companies, stakeholders, and the public that provides a foundation for informed discussion, analyses, and decisions.

Resources:

EPRI Releases the U.S. National Electrification Assessment

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) released the U.S. National Electrification Assessment. The study is an initial milestone for EPRI's Efficient Electrification Initiative; it assesses how rapid advances in innovative electric technologies may impact consumers' energy purchases and outlines the resulting implications for energy efficiency, the environment, and the electric grid. You can download a copy of this report here. Additionally, the US-REGEN model documentation has been updated to include descriptions of the end-use model's structure, data, and assumptions, which can be downloaded here.

EPRI at the Paris COP21 Meeting

Steven Rose and Richard Richels are participating at this year's United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 21), being held from 30 November to 11 December 2015 in Paris, France. Three sessions showcase EPRI research and expertise, continuing our long history of involvement in this prestigious conference series. The sessions, with topic descriptions and speaker organizations, are given below.

Read more PDF icon (419 KB)

EPRI Releases Expanded Summary Report on "The Value of Innovation in Environmental Controls" for the Electricity Sector and the U.S. Economy

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) released an expanded strategic analysis of key technology, market and policy uncertainties confronting the existing U.S. coal-based generation fleet over the next few decades on October 4, 2012. Today's release updates preliminary findings released by EPRI in May 2012. EPRI's "The Value of Innovation in Environmental Controls" analysis will help electric power companies understand the various environmental control technology options and costs they may face in the future. The report also outlines several key research and development (R&D) opportunities that can be pursued by EPRI and others to achieve the desired levels of environmental performance at a lower cost to society.

EPRI Publishes "Overview of Subnational Programs to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) as part of the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force"

This EPRI report (PID #1023811 ) is available online. This report reviews the status of 14 subnational programs around the world designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and activities designed to increase forest sequestration (REDD+ programs). The report assesses progress made towards the development of nine essential components of REDD+ programs, and evaluates the potential of these programs to provide high-quality GHG emissions offsets that could be used for compliance purposes in emerging GHG cap-and-trade systems in California and elsewhere, or transferred into other systems of performance-based compensation. The report presents four detailed case studies of REDD+ programs. It includes the two states (Acre, Brazil, and Chiapas, Mexico) that have signed a memorandum of understanding with the State of California to link their REDD+ programs with California's new GHG cap-and-trade system. It also includes the state that has achieved the greatest emissions reductions (Mato Grosso, Brazil), and one of the most mature REDD+ programs in Indonesia (Aceh). For more information contact Adam Diamant at Adiamant@epri.com; 510-260-9105).

Articles / Presentations

Social Cost of Carbon Peer-Reviewed Paper Published in Climate Change Economics Journal

Steven Rose, Delavane Diaz, and Geoff Blanford of EPRI authored a peer-reviewed paper entitled "Understanding the Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study" that was recently published in the scientific journal Climate Change Economics. The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary estimate of damages to society from global climate change caused by an additional unit of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. SCCs are used to estimate the benefits to society that result from policies limiting carbon dioxide emissions. For instance, the United States Government (USG) developed SCC estimates that have been used in dozens of federal rulemakings and have been adopted or considered by states, public utility commissions, companies, and other countries. USG agencies are legally required to value carbon dioxide emissions in rulemakings to evaluate the potential benefits of carbon dioxide reductions from regulations related to vehicles, appliances and industry, including the electric power industry. The USG SCC estimates are one alternative for meeting this requirement. SCC estimates, however, are difficult to interpret and assess because little is known about the modeling that underlies SCC values or the implied societal risks from global climate change. The study reported in this new journal article conducted the first in-depth examinations of the modeling and raw results underlying USG SCC estimation. The study used controlled diagnostic experiments that provided detailed intermediate results, which allowed for direct comparison of individual model components and facilitated evaluation of the individual model SCCs. The study found that there are significant differences in the structure, implementation and behavior of various SCC models and also identified opportunities for improving SCC estimation and increasing transparency and scientific and public confidence in results. Slides from a public webcast on the study are available here. For more information, contact Steven Rose, 202.293.6183, srose@epri.com.

EPRI Staff Contributes to Study on Valuing Climate Impacts and the Social Cost of Carbon

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine held a public symposium on June 14, 2017 for the release of the print version of its study "Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide." The study is also publicly available online. Steven Rose attended the symposium and was a member of the scientific expert committee that produced the study. The report evaluates potential approaches for updating the methodology used for estimating the social cost of carbon for U.S. regulatory analysis to ensure the methodology reflects the best available science. The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary estimate of damages to society from global climate change caused by an additional unit of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. The study recommends replacing the existing approach and moving away from the current models off-the-shelf, developing a new framework in which each step of the social cost of carbon calculation be developed as one of four separate but integrated modules: a socioeconomic module, a climate module, a climate damages module, and a discounting module. Data generated by the socioeconomic module would feed into the other three modules, and the temperature changes generated by the climate module would inform the damages module. The development of each module would be based on expertise in each discipline to ensure the modules reflect the most up-to-date and robust scientific understanding. This approach would not only strengthen the scientific basis for estimating the social cost of carbon but would also improve characterization of uncertainties and provide greater transparency. For more information, contact Steven Rose, 202.293.6183, srose@epri.com.

MSU-EPRI N2O Offsets Methodology Wins Key Approval

On April 2, 2013, EPRI and Michigan State University (MSU) announced the approval of their nitrous oxide (N2O) offsets methodology for use in the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets program. The methodology makes it possible for farmers to participate in carbon markets by creating GHG offsets through reducing the amount of nitrogen used to fertilize crops. Agricultural use of nitrogen fertilizer results in atmospheric N2O emissions, a potent greenhouse gas. The offsets can be sold to other carbon market participants to meet GHG emission reduction targets or requirements.

EPRI and MSU developed the methodology as part of a two-year collaborative research project. Similar methodologies developed by MSU and EPRI also have been approved under the Climate Action Reserve and the American Carbon Registry offset programs. The MSU-EPRI N2O emissions offsets protocol is the only offsets protocol that has been approved for use by all three of these voluntary offset programs.

For more information, contact Adam Diamant, 510.260.9105, adiamant@epri.com.

EPRI Presentation on Potential Use of GHG Emissions Offsets from Mexico for Compliance in California

On 10/2/12, Adam Diamant participated in a panel discussion at the Carbon Forum North America conference in Washington DC that focused on the recent passage of Mexico's General Law on Climate Change. Mr. Diamant's presentation focused on the potential for GHG emitters in California to use greenhouse gas emissions offsets created in Mexico for compliance purposes in the evolving California GHG emissions cap-and-trade program.

Download the presentation PDF icon (553 KB)

American Carbon Registry Approves MSU-EPRI Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Emissions Offsets Protocol

On July 18, 2012, the American Carbon Registry (ACR) of Winrock International announced approval of the Methodology for Quantifying Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Emissions Reductions from Reduced Use of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Agricultural Crops . The methodology, developed jointly by Michigan State University (MSU) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), makes it possible for corn farmers in the 12 states of the North Central Region (NCR) of the U.S. to participate in carbon markets by creating greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets by reducing the amount of nitrogen used to fertilize crops. Eligible states include: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. The estimated technical potential to achieve emission reductions using the MSU-EPRI methodology to reduce fertilizer rate in eligible NCR corn crops is 5-11 million metric tons of CO2e per year. The MSU-EPRI N2O offsets methodology was developed based on scientific R&D and field work completed as part of the EPRI Phase 1 and Phase 2 N2O Offset Supplemental projects. Read the complete ACR/MSU/EPRI press release online, and additional background information on the MSU-EPRI N2O Offsets Protocol . For more information, contact Adam Diamant at adiamant@epri.com or (510) 260-9105.

Resource Planning for Electric Power Systems

See a Summary of 2019 Deliverables: Program 178—Resource Planning for Electric Power Systems. The brochure summarizes PS178-A and PS178-B research into technology cost and performance, integrated system planning and market analysis, and technology innovation. The brochure includes abstracts and links to each publication.

  1. For archived material on the Clean Power Plan, please click here.
  2. For archived material on Strategic Energy Analysis, please click here.
  3. For archived material on Power Market Analysis please click here.

Clean Power Plan Analysis

In October 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's finalized the 'Clean Power Plan', a suite of regulations designed to reduce CO2 emissions from the U.S. electric sector. EPRI has conducted extensive analysis on the potential national and regional impacts of the Clean Power Plan under Program 103: Analysis of Environmental Policy Design, Implementation, and Company Strategy. As of July 2016, EPRI is also working with over 30 utilities in eight states on state specific analyses. EPRI is a participant in the Energy Modeling Forum's exercise to compare Clean Power Plan models.

The Clean Power Plan offers many options for compliance. States can choose between rate- or mass-based targets, whether to trade or not, and have some discretion in the choice of mitigation measures they can include in a State Implementation Plan. How states choose will greatly influence investment and generation decisions, and the development of trading markets. To analyse all these nuances, EPRI has modified the US-REGEN model to represent the least-cost compliance path for all of the lower 48 states simultaneously, given assumed decisions on rate versus mass targets, and trading blocs. This provides a powerful platform for consistent analysis of many of the compliance options available under the Clean Power Plan.

Read an introduction to EPRI's modeling of the Clean Power Plan

EPRI Comments

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002007325 EPRI Comments on EPA Federal Plan Requirements for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electric Utility Generating Units: Docket No. EPA–H Q–OAR–2015–0199 11-Jan-2016 Technical Results
3002004658 Comments of the Electric Power Research Institute On EPA's Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units [CAA § 111 (d)] 20-Oct-2014 Technical Results
EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
3002009492 Understanding Clean Power Plan Choices in Kansas: Options and Uncertainties 12-Jan-2017 Technical Results
3002009036 Understanding Clean Power Plan Choices in Michigan: Options and Uncertainties 1-Aug-2016 Technical Report
Articles / Presentations

Links will open a PDF in a new window/tab.

Title Author Published Venue
Potential Cross-State Power Flow Impacts of the CPP around Minnesota David Young October 31st, 2016 Minnesota Clean Power Plan Stakeholder Technical Meeting
The Electric Grid Revolution and the Clean Power Plan Video | Presentation

Francisco de la Chesnaye August 11, 2016 National Conference of State Legislators 2016
State Level Perspectives on the Clean Power Plan Francisco de la Chesnaye,
David Young,
Vic Niemeyer,
John Bistline
June 12, 2016 Edison Electric Institute Meetings 2016
State Level Perspectives on the Clean Power Plan David Young,
Vic Niemeyer,
John Bistline
May 10, 2016 ENV-VISION 2016
Cross-use of ERCs and Allowances by Mass- and Rate-path EGUs: Analysis and Simulation Results Vic Niemeyer May 10, 2016 ENV-VISION 2016
State Level Modeling of CPP Compliance Pathways with EPRI's US-REGEN Model Vic Niemeyer March 30, 2016 Midcontinental Power System Collaborative
The Clean Power Plan: Understanding Conflicting Modeling Results David Young March 22, 2016 Iowa 111(d) Stakeholder Meeting
Challenges in Modeling Rate vs. Mass Pathways for CPP Compliance Vic Niemeyer March 22, 2016 Indiana IRP Contemporary Issues Technical Conference
State Level Modeling of Clean Power Plan Compliance Pathways with EPRI's US-REGEN Model Vic Niemeyer March 16, 2016 Minnesota Clean Power Plan Stakeholder Technical Meeting
State Level Modeling of Clean Power Plan Compliance Pathways with EPRI's US-REGEN Model Vic Niemeyer February 11, 2016 RFF-EPRI Seminar on Modeling the Clean Power Plan

Strategic Energy Analysis

Strategic Energy Analysis, previously known as the Energy Technology Assessment Center or ETAC, conducts assessments of electricity sector technology needs with research focusing on interdisciplinary analysis of technology development, energy policy, and economic factors. Current research areas include:

  • Generation technology costs and performance
  • Technology trends and learning curve assumptions
  • Economic evaluation strategies
  • High level "reference cards" on key topics

The goal of the Strategic Energy Analysis research is to assure that ongoing debates among electricity sector stakeholders are based on sound technical and scientific information. Strategic Energy Analysis is supported by EPRI's Office of Technology Innovation, which identifies EPRI strategic research priorities through a portfolio of long-range R&D activities. This area builds on work previously done under the Energy Technology Assessment Center or ETAC.

EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
1026549 Choosing Electricity Generation Technologies: Generation Technology Reference Card 5-Oct-2012 Brochure
1022782 Program on Technology Innovation: Integrated Generation Technology Options 30-Jun-2011 Technical Update
1023166 Impacts of Wind Generation Integration 6-Jun-2011 Brochure
1020389 The Power to Reduce CO2 Emissions: The Full Portfolio 2009 Technical Report 26-Oct-2009 Corporate Identity Products
1019563 Prism/MERGE Analyses: 2009 Update 31-Jul-2009 EPRI Journal
1018431 The Power to Reduce CO2 Emissions: the Full Portfolio — 2008 Economic Sensitivity Studies 11-Dec-2008 Corporate Identity Products
1015461 The Power to Reduce CO2 Emissions: The Full Portfolio Discussion Paper 5-Sep-2007 Corporate Identity Products
Articles / Presentations

Links will open a PDF in a new window/tab.

Name Author Published Size
Generation Technology Options in a Carbon-Constrained World S. Inwood June 2011 717 KB

Power Market Analysis

Climate policy can significantly affect returns on existing capital and on new corporate investments. Sound analyses and clear communication are critical to creating effective corporate strategies. EPRI research analyzes the potential effects of climate policy on the electric sector at state and regional levels in order to help companies incorporate power market impacts into business and compliance strategies.

EPRI Reports

Links will open in a new window/tab.

Product ID Name Published Type
1013296 A Conceptual Framework for Modeling the Impact of CO2 Policy on Generator Cash Flows 20-Dec-2006 Technical Update
1012577 Program on Technology Innovation: Managing the Risks of Climate Policies 20-Dec-2006 Technical Report
Articles / Presentations

Links will open a PDF in a new window/tab.

Name Author Published Size
EUEC: Retrofit Investment in Existing Coal-fired Generation in a 4P World V. Niemeyer February 2009 717 KB
EPRI-Western Climate Policy Impacts Collaborative Webcast #1 V. Niemeyer June 2008 1.13 MB
EPRI-Western Climate Policy Impacts Collaborative Webcast #2 V. Niemeyer June 2008 827 KB
How Climate Policy Could Impact Electric Sector Emission Trading V. Niemeyer April 2008 454 KB