Carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation are a major cause of anthropogenic climate change. The deployment of wind and solar power reduces these emissions, but is subject to the variability of the weather. In the present study, we calculate the cost-optimized configuration of variable electrical power generators using weather data with high spatial (13-km) and temporal (60-min) resolution over the contiguous US. Our results show that when using future anticipated costs for wind and solar, carbon dioxide emissions from the US electricity sector can be reduced by up to 80% relative to 1990 levels, without an increase in the levelized cost of electricity. The reductions are possible with current technologies and without electrical storage. Wind and solar power increase their share of electricity production as the system grows to encompass large-scale weather patterns. This reduction in carbon emissions is achieved by moving away from a regionally divided electricity sector to a national system enabled by high-voltage direct-current transmission.
Your institute does not have access to this article
Open Access articles citing this article.
Frontiers of Engineering Management Open Access 09 August 2022
Philosophy & Technology Open Access 06 April 2022
Nature Communications Open Access 22 October 2021
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Hansen, J. et al. Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Science 213, 957–966 (1981).
Campbell, K. M. et al. The Age of Consequences: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Global Climate Change (Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2007).
Lobell, D. B. et al. Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science 319, 607–610 (2008).
Fischlin, A. et al. in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (eds Parry, M. L., Canziani, O. F., Palutikof, J. P., van der Linden, P. J. & Hanson, C. E.) 211–272 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).
Herring, S. C., Hoerling, M. P., Peterson, T. C. & Stott, P. A. (eds) Explaining extreme events of 2013 from a climate perspective. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 95, S1–S96 (2014).
World Energy Outlook 2013 169–197 (International Energy Agency, 2013).
Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change 1335, Table A.III.2 (ed. Schlömer, S.) (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
Renewable Electricity Futures Study Report No. NREL/TP-6A20-52409 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2012).
Nastrom, G. D., Gage, K. S. & Jasperson, W. H. Kinetic energy spectrum of large- and mesoscale atmospheric processes. Nature 310, 36–38 (1984).
Loulou, R., Goldstein, G. & Noble, K. Documentation for the MARKAL Family of Models (Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme, 2004); http://www.iea-etsap.org/web/MrklDoc-I_StdMARKAL.pdf
US Energy Information Administration The Electricity Market Module of the National Energy Modeling System: Model Documentation Report Report No. DOE/EIA-M068 (US Department of Energy, 2011).
World Energy Model Documentation 2015 Version (International Energy Agency, 2015); http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/2015/WEM_Documentation_WEO2015.pdf
Short, W. et al. Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) Report No. NREL/TP-6A20-46534 (US Department of Energy, 2011).
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Renewable Electricity Futures Study Report No. NREL/TP-6A20-52409 (US Department of Energy, 2012).
Fripp, M. Switch: a planning tool for power systems with large shares of intermittent renewable energy. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6371–6378 (2012).
PRISM 2.0: Regional Energy and Economic Model Development and Initial Application (Electric Power Research Institute, 2013).
Blanford, G. J., Merrick, J. H. & Young, D. A clean energy standard analysis with the US-REGEN model. Energy J. 35, SI1 (2014).
Alliss, R. et al. Introducing the Renewable Energy Network Optimization Tool (ReNOT) in 91st AMS Ann. Meet. Abstract J7.2 (American Meteorological Society, 2011).
Hart, E. K. & Jacobson, M. Z. A Monte Carlo approach to generator portfolio planning and carbon emissions assessments of systems with large penetrations of variable renewables. Renew. Energy 36, 2278–2286 (2011).
Budischak, C. et al. Cost-minimized combinations of wind power, solar power and electrochemical storage, powering the grid up to 99.9% of the time. J. Power Sources 225, 60–74 (2012).
Becker, S. et al. Features of a fully renewable US electricity system: optimized mixes of wind and solar PV and transmission grid extensions. Energy 72, 443–458 (2014).
Clack, C. T. M., Xie, Y. & MacDonald, A. E. Linear programming techniques for developing an optimal electrical system including high-voltage direct-current transmission and storage. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 68, 103–114 (2015).
Benjamin, S. G. et al. An hourly assimilation/forecast cycle: the RUC model. Mon. Weath. Rev. 132, 495–518 (2004).
Clack, C. T. M. et al. Demonstrating the effect of vertical and directional shear for resource mapping of wind power. Wind Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/we.1944 (2015).
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Form 714 (2006–2008) (US Department of Energy); http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms/form-714/data.asp
Lew, D. et al. Sub-Hourly Impacts of High Solar Penetrations in the Western United States (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, US Department of Energy, 2012); http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/56171.pdf
Energy Information Administration Electric Power Annual 2012 (US Department of Energy, 2012); http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/pdf/epa.pdf
Meah, K. & Ula, S. Comparative evaluation of HVDC and HVAC transmission systems. In Power Eng. Soc. General Meeting (IEEE, 2007); http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/PES.2007.385993
Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook (US Department of Energy, 2015); http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo
Macknick, J., Newmark, R., Heath, G. & Hallett, K. C. A Review of Operational Water Consumption and Withdrawal Factors for Electricity Generating Technologies Report No. NREL/TP-6A20-50900 (US Department of Energy, 2011).
Natural Gas Report (US Energy Information Administration, accessed 1 November 2014); http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_a_EPG0_PEU_DMcf_m.htm
The authors would like to thank M. Marquis and A. Reiser for their comments on the paper. The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provided funding for the project.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
About this article
Cite this article
MacDonald, A., Clack, C., Alexander, A. et al. Future cost-competitive electricity systems and their impact on US CO2 emissions. Nature Clim Change 6, 526–531 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2921
Philosophy & Technology (2022)
Frontiers of Engineering Management (2022)
Nature Energy (2021)
Solar energy and regional coordination as a feasible alternative to large hydropower in Southeast Asia
Nature Communications (2021)
Nature Communications (2021)