EnergyInnovation / eps-us

Energy Policy Simulator - United States
GNU General Public License v3.0
22 stars 7 forks source link

Update methodology for satisfying new electrolysis demand with 100% new clean resources #302

Open mkmahajan opened 6 months ago

mkmahajan commented 6 months ago

@dobrien13 pointed out that our current handling of hydrogen electrolysis with guaranteed clean electricity adds the incremental demand on top of the RPS requirement. However, for a region that doesn't have a BAU RPS and wants to look at just this policy, the requirement for green electrolysis won't be binding because the RPS will only be some small percentage.

In these cases, we can't simply make the RPS the expected BAU clean share + green hydrogen's share of electricity demand because the section of the RPS mechanism that estimates the clean share met by surviving capacity is on a one year time delay. To do this correctly from a "three pillars" perspective, we'd likely need a separate calculation for electricity capacity specifically constructed to meet hydrogen demand rather than fitting this into the RPS mechanism.

dobrien13 commented 2 months ago

@robbieorvis here^

robbieorvis commented 2 months ago

Looked into this today. It's not difficult to estimate the exact amount of clean needed, provided it's on an annual basis. However, It can't easily be integrated in to the CES mechanism and cost-effectiveness mechanism because of simultaneity in calculating certain variables. Since we want the capacity to be additive, no matter what, it may not matter, however.

My suggestion in the near term is to do the following:

1) Add a new capacity mechanism just downstream of the mandated capacity additions where these are added. 2) Then allocate new clean capacity to meet green hydrogen an an annual basis. This could be done one of two ways: a) Use exogenously specified shares to specific technologies. b) Implement a logit allocation that assigns the new clean MWh, using LCOE, to get a mix. This has the added benefit that we could use shareweights to specify mix changes over time, on top of LCOE, and that it would be adaptive to changing LCOEs and other policies. This would be my preferred approach. 3) Remove the green H2 calculations from the CES and ignore the capacity added for green H2 in the CES calculations. 4) If possible, allocate the costs to the hydrogen industry and update the costs accordingly. This last part might take a bit more work. Alternatively, we could just socialize the costs in the interim until we update the hydrogen sector correctly.