The Clean Power Plan - Impact on the US Nuclear Energy Industry and Analysis of Major Issues

摘要

On 3 August, 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the Clean Power Plan (CPP) Final Rule. This rule has been anticipated for multiple years and follows the Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule, which was initially released on June 18th, 2014. The Clean Power Plan sets limits on carbon dioxide (CO_2) emissions from existing stationary fossil-fuel-fired electricity generating units (EGUs). The CPP is implemented primarily by states, who must each develop and submit to the EPA a State Plan that will bring CO_2 emissions from affected EGUs in their jurisdiction into compliance with the limits the EPA has established. In this paper, we analyze the situation in four states (Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and Georgia) to identify the potential impacts and unintended consequences of the rule on electricity supply and carbon emissions. Some key findings: (1) The Clean Power Plan presented an opportunity for the EPA to properly value the reliability and low environmental impact of nuclear energy facilities, but that opportunity has been partially missed. (2) The EPA missed a particularly important opportunity to value nuclear energy in its decision not to allow credits for generation from nuclear energy facilities operating under a renewed license. (3) The existing nuclear fleet can only participate in CPP compliance if plant capacity is uprated. (4) These case studies confirm that new nuclear capacity can make substantial contributions toward CPP compliance and will definitely do so in Georgia. (5) Massachusetts may satisfy its final State Goal simply by replacing 2012 coal generation with increased use of current natural gas generators. New York comes very close to compliance by doing the same. (6) Analysis of scenarios in Massachusetts and New York confirms findings from previous investigations showing that, in some states and scenarios, it is possible to comply with the CPP State Goal while increasing the mass of total CO_2 emissions. (7) In both MA and NY, this can be accomplished by replacing both coal and nuclear generation with generation from new natural gas capacity. New NGCCs may also be the cheapest way each state could increase its generation capacity. (8) Large investments in new, low-emission generators are likely to be necessary in coal-intensive states, even in a case like Illinois where substantial low-emission capacity is already present and the statewide emission rate is below the national average.