Cap-and-trade policy: The influence on investments in carbon dioxide reducing technologies in Indiana
Abstract
With most of the energy produced in the state of Indiana coming from coal, the implementation of policy instruments such as cap-and-trade, which is included in the most recent climate bill, will have significant effects. This thesis provides an analysis of the effects that a cap-and-trade policy might have on the investment decisions for alternative technologies in the power plant sector in Indiana. Two economic models of representative coal-fired power plants, Gallagher (600MW) and Rockport (2600MW), are selected and used to evaluate the repowering decision of a plant for several technologies: integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), wind farm combined with natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) and supercritical pulverized coal (SCPC). The firm will make its decisions based on the net present value (NPV) of cost estimates for these CO2 reducing technologies, the cost of purchasing offsets and CO 2 allowances. This model is applied to a base case and three American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 cases derived from the Energy Information Administration (EIA, 2009b). A sensitivity analysis is done on the discount rate and capital costs. The results of the study indicate that a SCPC plant without carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the least costly compliance option for both plants under all of the cases while retrofitting the existing plant with CCS is the most expensive. Gallagher's three least expensive options across most scenarios were SCPC without CCS, the operation of the existing plant as is and investment in wind plus NGCC. Rockport's three least expensive compliance options across most scenarios were SCPC without CCS, the operation of the existing plant as is and IGCC without CCS. For both plants, when a 12% discount rate is utilized, NPV of costs are generally lower and the operation of the existing plant technology with the aid of allowances and offsets to be in compliance is the cheapest option. If capital costs were to decrease by 30%, a SCPC without CCS would remain the least costly option to invest in for both plants, but if costs were to increase by 30% operating the existing plant as is becomes the least pricey option.
Degree
M.S.
Advisors
Gramig, Purdue University.
Subject Area
Environmental economics|Agricultural economics|Energy
Off-Campus Purdue Users:
To access this dissertation, please log in to our
proxy server.