JP

Abstract: The design of water and energy systems has traditionally been done independently or considering simplified interdependencies between the two systems. This potentially misses valuable synergies between them and does not consider in detail the distribution of benefits between different sectors or regions. This paper presents a framework to couple integrated water-power network simulators with multi-objective optimisation under uncertainty to explore the implications of explicitly including spatial topology and interdependencies in the design of multi-sector integrated systems.

A synthetic case study that incorporates sectoral dependencies in resource allocation, operation of multi-purpose reservoirs and spatially distributed infrastructure selection in both systems is used. The importance of explicitly modelling the distribution of benefits across different sectors and regions is explored by comparing different spatially aggregated and disaggregated multi-objective optimisation formulations.

The results show the disaggregated formulation identifies a diverse set of non-dominated portfolios that enables addressing the spatial and sectoral distribution of benefits, whilst the aggregated formulations arbitrarily induce unintended biases. The proposed disaggregated approach allows for detailed spatial design of interlinked water and energy systems considering their complex regional and sectoral trade-offs. The framework is intended to assist planners in real resource systems where diverse stakeholder groups are mindful of receiving their fair share of development benefits.

Abstract: This study presents a screening-level analysis of the impacts of climate change on electricity transmission and distribution infrastructure of the U.S. In particular, the model identifies changes in performance and longevity of physical infrastructure such as power poles and transformers, and quantifies these impacts in economic terms. This analysis was evaluated for the contiguous U.S, using five general circulation models (GCMs) under two greenhouse gas emission scenarios, to analyze changes in damage and cost from the baseline period to the end of the century with three different adaptation strategies.

Total infrastructure costs were found to rise considerably, with annual climate change expenditures increasing by as much as 25%. The results demonstrate that climate impacts will likely be substantial, though this analysis only captures a portion of the total potential impacts. A proactive adaptation strategy resulted in the expected costs of climate change being reduced by as much as 50% by 2090, compared to a scenario without adaptation. Impacts vary across the contiguous U.S. with the highest impacts in parts of the Southeast and Northwest. Improvements and extensions to this analysis would help better inform climate resiliency policies and utility-level planning for the future.

Business closures. Travel restrictions. Working and learning from home. These and other dramatic responses to Covid-19 have caused sharp reductions in economic activity—and associated fossil fuel consumption—around the world. As a result, many nations are reporting significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for the year 2020, edging them a bit closer to meeting the initial emissions targets to which they committed under the Paris Agreement on climate change.

As the United States transitions from one administration bent on rolling back climate regulations to another that aims to accelerate climate action, it seems as good a time as any to take stock. What do scientists understand about today’s climate; how much worse are hurricanes, wildfires, heat waves and other climate impacts going to get in coming decades, and what does the country and world need to do to reduce the likelihood and severity of those impacts?

Pages

Subscribe to JP