Risk Analysis

From 1997 to 2009, Melbourne, Australia experienced what was ultimately called the Millennium Drought, the worst drought on record in the island continent. To compensate, the city’s water planners invested about $3 billion in 2007 in a 150-million-cubic-meter (MCM)/year reverse osmosis desalination plant. At the time, the plant was one of the largest of its kind in the world.

With a single executive order issued at the end of March, the Trump administration launched a robust effort to roll back Obama-era climate policies designed to reduce U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Chief among those policies is the Clean Power Plan, which targets coal and natural gas-fired electric power plants that account for about 40 percent of the nation’s CO2 emissions.

Given uncertainty in long-term carbon reduction goals, how much non-carbon generation should be developed in the near-term? This research investigates the optimal balance between the risk of overinvesting in non-carbon sources that are ultimately not needed and the risk of underinvesting in non-carbon sources and subsequently needing to reduce carbon emissions dramatically. We employ a novel framework that incorporates a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the U.S. into a two-stage stochastic approximate dynamic program (ADP) focused on decisions in the electric power sector. We solve the model using an ADP algorithm that is computationally tractable while exploring the decisions and sampling the uncertain carbon limits from continuous distributions.

The results of the model demonstrate that an optimal hedge is in the direction of more non-carbon investment in the near-term, in the range of 20-30% of new generation. We also demonstrate that the optimal share of non-carbon generation is increasing in the variance of the uncertainty about the long-term carbon targets, and that with greater uncertainty in the future policy regime, a balanced portfolio of non-carbon, natural gas, and coal generation is desirable.

On January 20 a new administration entered the White House determined to cut spending on climate change and environmental protection programs, and reduce restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. To help the MIT community better understand what’s at stake, graduate students with the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change presented seven courses on climate science and policy during the 2017 MIT Independent Activities Period.

Two veteran environmental economists at MIT, John Reilly (left) and Henry "Jake" Jacoby, briefly outline a couple of the most important, and least appreciated, facts about human-driven climate change. One is that the system has enormous inertia, preventing any quick fix. Another is that deep uncertainty surrounds the most consequential aspects of what's to come (pace and extent of warming, sea-level rise, for instance).

Pages

Subscribe to Risk Analysis