The benefits of solar power generation investment in renewable energy undervalued?

快乐 S Azevedo is earth's energy and environmental sciences (Stanford university The Earth at Stanford university, Stanford Earth) Resources department associate professor, is the one of the authors research papers, he says, the government officials who had been used to calculate the average emissions intensity power pollution value, but in some cases, if we do not adopt the method of marginal emissions, will make wrong judgment. PJM electricity each year about 800 trillion megawatts, enough to meet the one 5 of the electricity demand, accounting for about 20% of America's electricity industry. Priya Donti is at Carnegie Mellon university ( 卡内基梅隆大学) Doctoral student, also is one of the study co-author of the paper, he said: & other; Grid changes rapidly, emissions intensity data is often a significant lag?

if you want to solve this problem, to understand power system in different times each power plant emissions of pollutants. Decision makers by increasing renewable energy, energy efficiency or implementation to reduce carbon dioxide and other pollutants transportation electrification, power plant EPC and the question is: when making intervention measures to prevent air pollution harm health, how to do the best effect? Average, researchers say, is that if you use the PJM emissions intensity measure the impact of some intervention measures, may underestimate the loss effect, it is lower than marginal emissions is used to measure the result of nearly 50%. He said: & other; We hope to be able to help them planning interventions, maximize response to climate change and improve human health. ” The researchers also emphasized the importance of new emissions intensity valuations. Our research shows that the importance of data updating. By convention, decision makers and energy modeling engineer will according to the average annual emissions intensity of all power plants to estimate power system intervention measures to avoid the emissions. Think about other policymakers also will use the same method for city and state level climate action plan to provide information, the efficiency of solar panels that's very interesting. ” 【 Stanford Earth network October 15) Scientists, according to a major power distributor estimate carbon dioxide and other air pollutants emission intensity, and emphasize the key results of the study, for policymakers to reduce emissions and power system provides important information to make decisions. This method can help policy makers better understand the impact of different policies and investment choices. However, the above approach ignores the following situation: many interventions only affect certain power plant, and this influence every day or every year is different. Emissions intensity is used to measure the pollution load from each unit of energy on the grid. Scientists in the United States the largest PJM electricity market power analysis, to detect the difference between average and marginal emissions. Despite the huge benefits, thermoelectric power generation project benefit but the execution may be impeded. Donti said that these means can help policy makers to understand the different policies and the impact of investment options. The scientists to the study, published in the journal environmental science &technology, 环境科学与 技术) , the survey found, the garbage incineration power plant project in estimating intervention measures can avoid the emissions and the damage to health, environment and climate change, solar stent production enterprises ignore the difference between average marginal emissions and emissions will cause greater error. Azevedo mentioned climate organization for climate action, said: & other; Boston university using our previous done some work in marginal emissions, based on the different degree of the procurement measures to reduce emissions modeling, to determine where to purchase renewable energy. ” A new study suggests that, if every hour to collect the marginal emissions and the emission sites are also taken into account, policymakers may avoid missing important information. In other words, the use of average may be for policymakers to see half of the intervention effects. Their paper show that is only one year date estimate may overestimate the loss effect of 25% to 35%.