Paris Agreement Will Enter Into Force on Friday, November 4, 2016

Posted on October 6, 2016 by Anjali Patel

UPDATED 08.01.2018 On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

Yesterday, October 5, 2016 the Paris Agreement officially passed its international ratification threshold paving the way for the Agreement to enter into force on November 4, 2016.  Under Article 21 of the Paris Agreement, once 55 parties to the Convention accounting for at least 55% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions had deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession (Instruments) with the U.N. Depositary, the Agreement would become binding on those parties on the thirtieth day thereafter.

By September 21, over 55 parties had deposited their Instruments (including the United States  and China, which collectively represent 37.89% of the global greenhouse gas emissions).  But the emission threshold was not passed until October 5 [link removed], when 74 parties to the Convention had deposited their Instruments representing a combined total of 58.82% of global greenhouse gas emissions.  Members of the European Union, Canada, and India are among the parties that deposited their Instruments this week.

According to an Information Note prepared by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Legal Affairs Programme, once the Agreement enters into force:

  • The institutional structures and arrangements of the Agreement will become operational;
  • The [U.N.] secretariat, under the guidance of the Bureau of the Conference of the Parties (COP), will need to make arrangements for convening the first session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA) in conjunction with the first session of the COP scheduled after the date of entry into force of the Agreement;
  • Parties to the Agreement will exercise governance, oversight, leadership and decision-making over the Agreement;
  • Specific legal, procedural and substantive rights and obligations will become effective for Parties to the Agreement, in particular substantive obligations relating to … nationally determined contributions, support and transparency, in accordance with the requirements and time frames specified in the Agreement;
  • Implementation of the Agreement may commence at the international, regional and national levels.

Please refer to our earlier post here for more information about the impact and legal obligations of the Paris Agreement with the respect to the United States.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Paris Agreement Will Enter Into Force on Friday, November 4, 2016

EPA Large Facility Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data Shows Decrease in Power Plant Emissions

Posted on October 6, 2016 by Anjali Patel

EPA recently released its 2015 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) data.  The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program collects greenhouse gas (GHG) emission information from large industrial sources, including power plants.  The EPA’s GHGRP website includes access to the 2015 data sets, industry specific emission profiles, and EPA’s Facility Level Information on GHGs Tool (FLIGHT).  FLIGHT allows users to, among other things, view the top emitters by state or region, track emission trends, and download maps and charts.

In 2015, the power plant sector, which includes fossil fuel fired and biomass facilities that produce electricity, collectively reported close to 2.0 billion metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of GHG emissions.  (The “carbon dioxide equivalent” metric reflects multiple GHG emissions including carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions.)  For comparison purposes the second highest sector, the oil and gas sector—which includes, among other things, onshore and offshore oil and gas production facilities, natural gas processing and distribution facilities, and liquefied natural gas import/export and storage facilities—collectively reported around 200 million metric tons CO2e.  And based on the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory data, which tracks total annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and removals by source, the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions for 2014 was around 6.9 billion metric tons CO2e.

When the power plant sector 2015 GHG emissions are compared against the sector’s emissions in previous years, it shows that emissions by the sector have been declining.  In 2011, when EPA first started collecting and reporting the GHGRP data, the power plant sector reported over 2.2 billion metric tons CO2e of GHG emissions.  The 2015 data reflects an 11% decline from 2011.  The data also show a decline since 2011 of each individual greenhouse gas emitted by the power plant sector, including an 11% decline in carbon dioxide emissions, a 14% decline in methane emissions, and a 20% decline in nitrous oxide.  Reports from the Energy Information Administration suggest that the decline could, in part, be due to the changing resource mix.

In announcing the release [link eliminated] of the 2015 GHGRP data, EPA stated that it expects to release in April 2017 updated Greenhouse Gas Inventory data with emission information from 2015.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | Comments Off on EPA Large Facility Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data Shows Decrease in Power Plant Emissions

FERC Announces Technical Conference on Electric Storage Resources

Posted on October 4, 2016 by Amber Martin

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has announced plans to convene a technical conference on November 9, 2016 regarding utilization of electric storage resources in the wholesale electric markets.

The Notice of Technical Conference describes electric storage resources as facilities that can receive electric energy from the grid and store it for later injection of electricity back to the grid, regardless of size, storage medium, or interconnection point.  Through the conference, FERC seeks to explore the circumstances under which electric storage resources can be utilized as transmission assets, to provide grid support services, or to provide multiple services.

Although FERC plans to issue a more detailed description of the technical conference agenda in a supplemental notice closer to the conference date, FERC has identified the following specific topics for the conference:

  • Potential cost recovery for electric storage resources utilized as both transmission assets and providers of energy, capacity, or ancillary service;
  • Potential models to enable an electric storage resource to provide a compensated grid support service (e.g., a generator providing ancillary services under a reliability must-run contract) rather than being compensated for providing transmission service; and
  • Practical considerations for electric storage resources providing multiple services at once (i.e., providing both wholesale service(s) and retail and/or end-use service(s)).

Parties wishing to speak at the conference should complete FERC’s nomination form by October 14, 2016.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on FERC Announces Technical Conference on Electric Storage Resources

LBNL Releases Reports on Utility Planning for a Changing Grid

Posted on September 29, 2016 by Anjali Patel

The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory recently released two reports related to utility planning efforts for future changes to the electric grid. The first, The Future of Electricity Resource Planning, is coauthored by Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) and is the sixth report in the Lab’s Future Electric Utility Regulation series.  The report explores emerging issues and best practices related to electricity resource planning for the bulk power system.  It is based on recent resource plans from ten utilities around the country.

In addressing five areas that will affect resource planning (central-scale generation, distributed generation, demand-side resources, transmission, and uncertainty and risk management), The Future of Electricity Resource Planning responds to the following questions:

  • How are utilities, Regional Transmission Operators/Independent System Operators (RTOs/ISOs), and states currently addressing each of these areas in resource planning processes?
  • What key issues are emerging for resource planning in each area?
  • What kinds of planning practices in each area will enable the electricity industry to more proactively respond to a changing industry paradigm?
  • What are key considerations for regulators going forward?

A presentation on The Future of Electricity Resource Planning is available here.

The other report, Planning for a Distributed Disruption: Innovative Practices for Incorporating Distributed Solar into Utility Planning, addresses utility efforts to plan for customer-led grid changes.  The report focuses on distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) generation of 5 MW or less.  It addresses the fact that distributed solar PV can both impact and offset the need for new energy infrastructure.  In other words, while distributed solar PV may require transmission or distribution system upgrades, it could also act as a transmission alternative or reduce the need for new capacity.

Planning for a Distributed Disruption is based on a comparative analysis of 30 recent utility integrated resources plans (IRPs), transmission planning studies, and distribution system plans.  It reviews various approaches that utilities and transmission planning regions have used to plan for the integration of distributed solar PV generation, highlights best practices, and offers suggestions for improving planning methodologies.  The report is divided into nine sections to address the following questions:

  1. How do planners forecast future customer adoption of distributed solar PV?
  2. How do planners ensure their planning decisions make sense even if there is uncertainty in how much distributed solar PV will be adopted in the future?
  3. How do planners evaluate the potential for distributed solar PV to be proactively deployed as a resource to meet projected needs?
  4. How do planners account for the variable and uncertain nature of generation from distributed solar PV when assessing its impacts on needs or its potential value as a resource?
  5. How do planners account for the location-specific benefits and impacts of distributed solar PV and how do they predict where such projects will be located?
  6. How do planners evaluate the impact that distributed solar PV generation will have on the need for transmission and load investments?
  7. How do planners estimate the impact of distributed solar PV on avoided losses?
  8. How do planners account for the changes that may result in distributed solar PV benefits and impacts with a higher solar penetration?
  9. How do planners coordinate assumptions, scenarios, benefits, and impacts of distributed solar PV across generation, transmission, and distribution planning functions?

A presentation on Planning for a Distributed Disruption can be found here.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on LBNL Releases Reports on Utility Planning for a Changing Grid

It’s a Wrap: D.C. Circuit Finishes “Marathon” Day of Oral Arguments

Posted on September 28, 2016 by Jeff Bayne

The D.C. Circuit’s CPP oral arguments continued through yesterday afternoon with counsel addressing the final three argument segments: (1) constitutional issues, (2) notice issues, and (3) record-based issues not submitted on briefs. As was case in the morning session, the ten judges were actively involved in their questioning and showed little interest in holding the parties to the time limits set in its earlier order.

The constitutional issues were scheduled for just 24 minutes but lasted well over an hour. Judge Tatel repeatedly questioned challengers’ argument that the CPP entails unconstitutional federal commandeering of states, asking how the CPP is any different than the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires states to use zoning and police powers to enforce federal mandates.  The judges also pushed the CPP supporters to respond to the argument that ensuring reliable electricity is a core state function beyond EPA’s authority.

Compared to the other topics, the judges had fewer questions about the notice issues and let the parties speak uninterrupted for relatively long stretches of time. Many of the questions that were raised pertained to procedural requirements related to the numerous petitions for reconsideration still pending before EPA.

Finally, the court heard arguments on other record-based issues. Judge Kavanaugh jumped in early on both sides with questions challenging the CPP opponents’ claim that EPA’s emission-reduction targets are not achievable and with questions to CPP’s supporters as to whether there are avenues for people to bring legal challenges in the future if EPA’s predictions and estimates prove to be wrong.  Other judges also raised questions about what will happen if certain states are simply unable to meet the CPP’s targets despite good faith efforts.

Audio recordings of the morning and afternoon sessions of the oral argument are now available on the D.C. Circuit’s website.  As the court noted at the close of arguments, it’s now up to the judges.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on It’s a Wrap: D.C. Circuit Finishes “Marathon” Day of Oral Arguments