Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Integrated hydrological, power system and economic modelling of climate impacts on electricity demand and cost


Impacts of climate-related water stress and temperature changes can cascade through energy systems, although models have yet to capture this compounding of effects. Here, we employ a coupled water–power–economy model to capture these important interactions in a study of the exceedance of water temperature thresholds for power generation in the western United States. We find that not all reductions in reserve electricity-generation capacity result in impacts, and that when they occur, intermittent interruptions in electricity supply at critical times of the day, week and year account for much of the economic impacts. Finally, we find that impacts may be in different locations from the original water stress. We estimate that the consumption loss can be up to 0.3% annually and the drivers identified in coupled modelling can increase the average cost of electricity by up to 3%.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Electricity cost and unmet demand from 18 high-impact scenarios.
Fig. 2: Economic impacts from 18 high-impact scenarios.
Fig. 3: Sectoral economic impacts from 18 high-impact scenarios and details for one scenario.
Fig. 4: Electricity sector and economy-wide impacts before and after economic adjustment from 18 high-impact scenarios.
Fig. 5: Geographic distribution of impacts on the power system network for one example week.

Data availability

Source data are provided with this paper. The datasets from this analysis are publicly available. The results of GFDL Sullivan feedback are available at The results of GFDL no Sullivan feedback are available at The WBM output daily discharge and water temperature all GCMs are available at Access to portions of the input data pertaining to the network and hydrogeneration schedules require permission from the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), All remaining data are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Code availability

All code is available from the corresponding author on request.


  1. Craig, M. T. et al. A review of the potential impacts of climate change on bulk power system planning and operations in the United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 98, 255–267 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Miara, A. et al. Climate and water resource change impacts and adaptation potential for US power supply. Nat. Clim. Chang. 7, 793–799 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. van Vliet, M. T. H., Sheffield, J., Wiberg, D. & Wood, E. F. Impacts of recent drought and warm years on water resources and electricity supply worldwide. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 124021 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yalew, S. G. et al. Impacts of climate change on energy systems in global and regional scenarios. Nat. Energy 5, 794–802 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. de Nooij, M., Koopmans, C. & Bijvoet, C. The value of supply security: the costs of power interruptions: economic input for damage reduction and investment in networks. Energy Econ. 29, 277–295 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sullivan, M. J., Mercurio, M., Schellenberg, J. & Freeman, M. A. Estimated Value of Service Reliability for Electric Utility Customers in the United States (Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2009);

  7. Sanstad, A. H., Zhu, Q., Leibowicz, B., Larsen, P. H. & Eto, J. H. Case Studies of the Economic Impacts of Power Interruptions and Damage to Electricity System Infrastructure from Extreme Events (Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2020);

  8. Water Quality Standards Handbook (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2017);

  9. Temperature: Water Quality Standards Criteria Summaries: A Compilation of State/Federal Criteria (US Environmental Protection Agency, 1988).

  10. Joskow, P. L. Restructuring, competition and regulatory reform in the U.S. electricity sector. J. Econ. Perspect. 11, 119–138 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Vliet, M. T. H., Vogele, S. & Rubbelke, D. Water constraints on European power supply under climate change: impacts on electricity prices. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 035010 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Macknick, J. et al. Water and Climate Impacts on Power System Operations: The Importance of Cooling Systems and Demand Response Measures (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2016).

  13. Grogan, D. S. Global and Regional Assessments of Unsustainable Groundwater Use in Irrigated Agriculture. PhD thesis, Univ. New Hampshire (2016).

  14. Wisser, D., Fekete, B. M., Vörösmarty, C. J. & Schumann, A. H. Reconstructing 20th century global hydrography: a contribution to the Global Terrestrial Network- Hydrology (GTN-H). Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 14, 1–24 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Stewart, R. J. et al. Horizontal cooling towers: riverine ecosystem services and the fate of thermoelectric heat in the contemporary Northeast US. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 025010 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ho, J. L. et al. Planning Transmission for Uncertainty: Applications and Lessons for the Western Interconnection (Western Electricity Coordinating Council, 2016);

  17. Shayesteh, E., Hobbs, B. F. & Amelin, M. Scenario reduction, network aggregation, and dc linearisation: which simplifications matter most in operations and planning optimisation? IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 10, 2748–2755 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Munoz, F. D., Hobbs, B. F., Ho, J. L. & Kasina, S. An engineering-economic approach to transmission planning under market and regulatory uncertainties: WECC case study. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29, 307–317 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Munoz, F. D., Hobbs, B. F. & Watson, J.-P. New bounding and decomposition approaches for MILP investment problems: multi-area transmission and generation planning under policy constraints. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 248, 888–898 (2016).

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rausch, S. & Rutherford, T. F. Tools for Building National Economic Models Using State-Level Implan Social Accounts (ETH Zurich, 2009);

  21. Böhringer, C. & Rutherford, T. F. Integrated assessment of energy policies: decomposing top-down and bottom-up. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 33, 1648–1661 (2009).

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling, Multi Sector Dynamics, contract no. DE-SC0016162. We thank S. Glidden (UNH) who harmonized and geolocated the power-plant database and A. Prusevich (UNH) who ran the WBM for these experiments and generated the data for Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary Fig. 2.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



M.W., K.F.-V. and R.B.L. conceived and designed the experiments. M.W., K.F.-V., V.K. and R.B.L. analysed the data. M.W., K.F.-V., J.P., V.K. and R.B.L. developed the models and coordinated the model experiments. M.W., K.F.-V. and R.B.L. wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mort Webster.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review information

Nature Energy thanks Andres Clarens and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Notes 1–8, Figs. 1–9 and Tables 1–5.

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Cost and unmet demand of selected scenarios, discrete event counts for unmet-demand episodes.

Source Data Fig. 2

Economic losses from scenarios due to cost only, unmet demand only and both factors.

Source Data Fig. 3

Manufacturing losses by scenario, sectoral losses by sector for one scenario.

Source Data Fig. 4

Economic impacts with and without economic adjustment.

Source Data Fig. 5

Locations of generator outages, congested transmission lines and locations of unmet demand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Webster, M., Fisher-Vanden, K., Kumar, V. et al. Integrated hydrological, power system and economic modelling of climate impacts on electricity demand and cost. Nat Energy 7, 163–169 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing