AEC’s Emissions Measurement Inventory Tool (AEC-EMIT)

Author: Joshua R. Castigliego

December 2023

To support AEC’s emissions accounting work, Researcher Joshua R. Castigliego developed a spreadsheet-based tool—AEC's Emissions Measurement Inventory Tool (AEC-EMIT)—that provides users with an interface to build a greenhouse gas emissions inventory (and 20-year emissions projections) for a specific geographic region. Users can customize the tool by selecting greenhouse gases, sectors, subsectors, scenarios, sensitivities, and other information specific to their inventory. Users are also provided a dashboard to toggle select assumptions and parameters (e.g., global warming potentials, scenarios, and sensitivities, etc.). Summary tabs aggregate results across sectors and can be used to provide disaggregated sub-sector-specific results.

AEC-EMIT was utilized for AEC’s analysis on Puerto Rico’s 2019 and 2021 Greenhouse Gas Inventories Report.

Return to our Work

Puerto Rico’s 2019 and 2021 Greenhouse Gas Inventories Report

Client: Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources (DNER)

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD, Joshua R. Castigliego, Chirag T. Lala, Sachin Peddada,
Jay Bonner, Eliandro Tavares, Sumera Patel, Alicia Zhang, Myisha Majumder,
David Jiang, and Jordan Burt; Ramón Bueno and Kari Hewitt

July 2023

On behalf of the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources (DNER), AEC staff and partners prepared a report that presents the results for Puerto Rico’s 2019 and 2021 greenhouse gas emission inventories together with 20-year emissions projections under several scenarios and sensitivities. AEC established a methodology for conducting greenhouse gas emission inventories in Puerto Rico, which went through a comprehensive quality assurance and quality control process by an Expert Panel (established for this project and composed of experts in greenhouse gas emissions measurement and Puerto Rico climate and energy issues). Using AEC’s Emissions Measurement Inventory Tool (AEC-EMIT), AEC calculates net greenhouse gas emissions released in Puerto Rico’s seven emitting sectors: (1) Power Supply, (2) Direct Fuel, (3) Industrial Processes and Product Use, (4) Transportation, (5) Agriculture, (6) Forestry and Other Land Use, and (7) Waste Management.

Puerto Rico’s 2019 Climate Change Mitigation, Adaption, and Resiliency Law (i.e., Puerto Rico Act No. 33-2019) measures mandated emission reductions against an estimated 2005 emissions level of 53.3 MMT CO₂e and calls for a 50 percent reduction relative to 2005 emissions by 2025 (26.7 MMT CO₂e). Emission levels achieved in 2021 (34.3 MMT CO₂e) represent a 36 percent reduction in emissions from 2005 levels. With 14 percentage points and 4 years left to go, Puerto Rico must find another 7.7 MMT CO₂e to eliminate. Based on the Business-as-Usual projection in AEC’s analysis, Puerto Rico’s greenhouse gas emission levels will reach their mandated levels (50 percent of 2005 levels, or 26.7 MMT CO₂e) in 2035, 10 years later than the required 2025 target.

Based on the analysis presented in this report, AEC has identified several key recommendations to further facilitate Puerto Rico’s work towards achieving its ambitious and necessary decarbonization goals set out in Puerto Rico’s 2019 Climate Change Mitigation, Adaption, and Resiliency Law, including: (1) better data collection, (2) increased climate progress reporting (3) reprioritization in rebuilding its electric sector, and (4) a new focus in transportation planning.

Link to Report (English)

Link to Report (Español)

Return to Publications

Assessing TVA’s IRP Planning Practices

Norris Dam in Anderson County, Tennessee. Image Credit: Brian Stansberry / Creative Commons

Client: Prepared on behalf of the Southern Environmental Law Center

Authors: Chirag Lala, Elisabeth Seliga, Liz Stanton, PhD

July 2023

On behalf of the Southern Environmental Law Center, Researcher Chirag Lala, Assistant Researcher Elisabeth Seliga, and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD published a report that compares the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA’s) Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) processes in 2011, 2015, and 2019 to the actual changes in capacity additions and retirements made by TVA from 2011 to 2021. The paper also examines the site-specific planning process used by TVA to determine the replacements for the Cumberland Fossil Plant.

AEC staff make several key recommendations for TVA’s 2024 Integrated Resource Planning Process: (1) TVA must set aggressive climate goals in line with the Paris Agreement and the Biden Administration’s executive orders on achieving carbon free electricity by 2035; (2) TVA must be transparent about its assumptions and modeling inputs; (4) TVA must select a portfolio with a more targeted preferred resource plan; (3) TVA must plan to utilize the grants, loans, and tax credits of the Inflation Reduction Act; (5) TVA must clarify how it demarcates “ownership” of solar and wind resource; (6) TVA should conduct an all-resource Request for Proposals (RFP) for new resources; (7) TVA must ensure its site-specific planning documents reflect the most recent IRP plans and use methods that do not contradict overall system- and other site-specific planning exercises.

Link to Report

Link to Environmental Group Comments on TVA IRP

Return to Publications

The Interconnection Bottleneck: Why Most Energy Storage Projects Never Get Built

Image Credit: Sara Levine | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Client: Prepared on behalf of Clean Energy Group

Authors: Chirag Lala, Jordan Burt, Sachin Peddada

May 2023

On behalf of the Clean Energy Group, Researcher Chirag Lala and Assistant Researchers, Sachin Pedadda and Jordan Burt prepared a report that assesses the obstacles preventing efficient interconnection of distributed energy storage resources. This Applied Economics Clinic (AEC) white paper identifies and explains these interconnection barriers in Massachusetts and makes recommendations to state agencies and working groups overseeing interconnection, distribution utilities, independent system operators, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  

AEC staff make these five key recommendations to stakeholders: (1) Develop proactive, integrated, and system-wide interconnection planning that takes a systemic view of applications and separates hosting capacity upgrades from particular project or cluster applications and makes hosting capacity upgrades in anticipation of grid-needs and future interconnection volume. (2) Continuously iterate interconnection processes to build in regular improvements, examine effectiveness, and coordinate public and private stakeholders to tackle ad hoc coordination problems. (3) Tackle barriers and solutions comprehensively by integrating multiple solutions. (4) End cost causation by spreading distribution system upgrade costs over a broader set of stakeholders (including ratepayers) than just allocating those costs to the projects or clusters applying for interconnection. (5) Incorporate storage operational parameters into interconnection processes so that storage resources are assessed in a manner reflecting how they would reasonably be expected to operate once interconnected alone or in conjunction with technologies regulating bidirectional power flows and facilitating predictable charging and discharging.

Link to Report

Return to Our Work

Massachusetts MLPs Exemption from RPS: Impacts on Clean Energy

Client: Prepared on behalf of Massachusetts Climate Action Network

Authors: Tanya Stasio, PhD, Elisabeth Seliga, Liz Stanton, PhD

April 2023

On behalf of the Massachusetts Climate Action Network, Researcher Dr. Tanya Stasio, Assistant Researcher Elisabeth Seliga, and Senior Economist Dr. Liz Stanton prepared a presentation on the Massachusetts Municipal Light Plant (MLP) exemption from the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and the impact on clean energy in the Commonwealth. AEC finds that the MLP Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standard, and the RPS exemption, allow MLPs to remain at today's level of Class I renewable energy sources, resulting in substantially less clean energy in the Commonwealth than if MLPs were required to comply with the RPS.

This work was presented at the April 19th, 2023 MCAN Legislative Launch titled, "Advancing Clean Energy, Equity, and Innovation in Municipal Utilities." For more information, or to watch the recording of the event, visit the MCAN website here.

Link to Presentation

Return to Our Work

Consumers Energy Rate Case Testimony

Client:
Michigan Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Citizens Utility Board of Michigan

Author:
Tyler Comings

June 2021

AEC Senior Researcher Tyler Comings filed testimony on the Consumers Energy 2021 rate case in Michigan. Mr. Comings analyzed the economics of coal units Campbell 1 and 2, concluding that they should be considered for retirement in 2024 or 2025. He also recommended that certain capital costs not be allowed in rates because they could be avoided if the units were to retire in those years. (Subsequent to Mr. Comings' testimony, Consumers Energy announced a plan to retire all of its coal units by 2025.)

Link to Testimony

Return to Our Work

Benefits of Net Zero Buildings for the Town of Bedford

Client:
Facilities Department of the Town of Bedford, MA

Authors:
Bryndis Woods, PhD and Joshua R. Castigliego

June 2021

On behalf of the Facilities Department of the Town of Bedford, Massachusetts, Senior Researcher Bryndis Woods, PhD and Researcher Joshua R. Castigliego prepared a report outlining the Town’s climate and energy goals and how investments in Net Zero and Net Zero Ready buildings can contribute to these goals and provide additional health, comfort, cost savings, resiliency, and safety benefits. Achieving the Town’s goal of net-zero energy use in all municipal buildings by 2030 will require investments in “Net Zero” buildings—which generate at least as much renewable energy in a year as they consume—and “Net Zero Ready” buildings—which reduce building energy and fossil fuel use to the point that any remaining emissions could be offset with purchases of carbon offset credits. In this report, AEC analyzes proposed Net Zero Ready investments in Bedford High School’s heating and cooling system. We find that Net Zero Ready investments are $2.9 million more expensive than a gas-fired alternative over 20 years; every “extra” thousand dollars invested in Net Zero Ready would provide the Town with a reduction benefit of 2 metric tons of carbon dioxide over the equipment lifetime. A Net Zero Ready Bedford High School would reduce average annual emissions from the High School by 64 percent and the Town’s municipal buildings by 21 percent.

Link to Report

Return to Our Work

Comments on 2021 Guidance Towards Updating the U.S. Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases

Client: Friends of the Earth

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD, Chirag Lala, and Tanya Stasio

June 2021

Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD and Research Assistants Chirag Lala and Tanya Stasio prepared comments on the 2021 guidance towards updating the U.S. social cost of greenhouse gases (SC-GHG) on behalf of Friends of the Earth.
AEC staff recommend that the current revision to the U.S. SC-GHG: (1) Estimate climate damages in a single model; (2) Include climate damages around the world; (3) Value for future climate impacts; (4) Place equal value on all people, all families, and all communities; (5) Set fair and effective emission reduction targets, and; (6) Have a clear process for updating the SC-GHGs over time.

Link to Comments

Link to News Release, Common Dreams

Link to News Release, Friends of the Earth

Link to News Release, Red, Green and Blue

Return to Our Work

Benefits of Net Zero Buildings: Comfort, Safety, Value, Climate

Client: Massachusetts Climate Action Network (MCAN)

Authors: Bryndis Woods and Eliandro Tavares

January 2020

On behalf of the Massachusetts Climate Action Network (MCAN), AEC has prepared a policy brief that presents a summary of the benefits of Net Zero buildings, such as enhanced health and comfort, home durability and safety, better value, and positive climate effects. A Net Zero building produces at least as much renewable energy in a year as it consumes, and the technology is currently ready for implementation.

Link to Policy Brief

Return to Our Work

Massachusetts Gas versus Massachusetts Climate Goals

Client: Gas Leak Allies

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD, Bryndis Woods, Joshua Castigliego and Eliandro Tavares

December 2019

Prepared on behalf of Gas Leak Allies by Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, Researchers Bryndis Woods and Joshua Castigliego, and Assistant Researcher Eliandro Tavares, this Applied Economics Clinic policy brief demonstrates why Massachusetts cannot both continue to utilize gas for heating and meet legally mandated statewide emission reduction targets. There is a clear economic argument for focusing gas system investments on improving safety while transitioning away from gas to clean, highly efficient technologies as quickly as possible. Moving away from gas will make communities safer, save utility customers money, and meet the Commonwealth’s climate goals.

Link to Policy Brief

Return to Our Work

Marginal Cost of Emissions Reductions in Massachusetts

Client: Green Energy Consumers Alliance (GECA)

Authors: Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, Research Assistant Tanya Stasio and Researcher Bryndis Woods

November 2019

Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, Research Assistant Tanya Stasio and Researcher Bryndis Woods prepared a white paper that estimates the per ton cost of the most expensive measure needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 21 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂-e) by 2030—as required by the Commonwealth’s Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA). AEC projects that the most expensive (per ton of CO₂-e) measure needed to comply with the GWSA in 2030 will be residential and commercial thermal electrification: switching from burning gas to using electric heat pumps. The estimated cost of switching from gas to electric heat pumps in 2030 is $13 per ton of avoided CO₂-e. In total, 12.2 MMT of CO₂-e reductions in 2030 can be achieved at zero or net negative cost. An additional 64.0 MMT are available for under $50 per ton. In sum, there are sufficient cost-effective opportunities to meet and even exceed the reductions needed to stay on track with GWSA targets.

Link to White Paper

Return to Our Work

Technosilvicultural Reclamation for Environmental Emission Sequestration

Clients: Home Energy Efficiency Team (HEET) and Speak for the Trees (SFTT)

Authors: Bryndis Woods and Liz Stanton, PhD

November 2019

Researcher Bryndis Woods and Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD prepared a policy brief that compares two cutting-edge carbon dioxide emission sequestration (or storage) technologies on the basis of cost, history of success, near-term commercial viability, co-benefits, and potential risks: 1) Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), and 2) Technosilvicultural Reclamation for Environmental Emission Sequestration (TREES). Our assessment finds TREES facilities to be competitive with, or superior to, CCS in all evaluation categories: TREES facilities are less expensive per ton of CO2 stored, have a longer history of success, stronger near-term viability, more robust co-benefits, and fewer risks than CCS.

Link to Report

Return to Our Work

Comparative Costs of Alaska Fire Management

Client: Union of Concerned Scientists

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD, Sagal Alisalad, and Myisha Majumder

September 2019

Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, Assistant Researcher Sagal Alisalad, and Research Assistant Myisha Majumder prepared a report that estimates the cost of fire management per tonne of CO₂ in Alaska using data on fire incidents in Alaska from 2007 to 2015. The report used econometric analysis to estimate the effects of fire management on the number of acres burned and calculate the cost to avoid forest fire per tonne of CO₂ saved. The report also presented costs of fire damages for a number of categories including property losses and timber lost.

Link to Report

Return to Our Work

Emission Reduction Synergies for Massachusetts Community Choice Energy Programs, Heat Pumps and Electric Vehicles

Client: Green Energy Consumers Alliance (GECA)

Authors: Bryndis Woods, Liz Stanton, PhD, Tyler Comings and Eliandro Tavares

August 2019

Researcher Bryndis Woods, Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, Senior Researcher Tyler Comings and Assistant Researcher Eliandro Tavares prepared a policy brief that estimates the greenhouse gas emissions reduction impact from an electric heat pump or electric vehicle of a typical Massachusetts household enrolled in a Community Choice Energy (CCE) program. We find that Massachusetts households that have an electric heat pump or electric vehicle—as opposed to natural gas heating and electric A/C or a gas vehicle—and are enrolled in a CCE program with 5 percent additional renewable supply than mandated by state law reduce their emissions by 69 and 74 percent, respectively, in 2030.

Link to Policy Brief

Link to Citations and Notes

Return to Our Work

Comment on Transco's Assessment of Net Greenhouse Gas Emissions from NYC's Proposed NESE Pipeline

Client: Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Author: Liz Stanton, PhD

July 2019

Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, assisted the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in comments on Transco’s assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the Northeast Supply Enhancement Project (NESE) expansion of its existing interstate pipeline to bring additional gas capacity to New York City and Long Island. Dr. Stanton concluded that Williams’ assessment rests on several faulty assumptions that overstate the emissions of alternatives to the pipeline, and that the evidence supplied by Transco does not support their claim that NESE would lower emissions.

Link to Comment (starting on pdf p.30)

Return to Our Work

Home Heat Pumps in Massachusetts

Client: Green Energy Consumers Alliance (GECA)

Authors: Ricardo Lopez, PhD, Tyler Comings, Liz Stanton, PhD, and Eliandro Tavares

November 2018 - May 2019

Senior Researchers Ricardo Lopez, PhD and Tyler Comings, Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD and Assistant Researcher Eliandro Tavares prepared a report that assessed the cost to replace residential heating and cooling systems with: 1) a gas furnace and electric central air conditioning (AC), or 2) an electric heat pump that provides both heating and cooling. The report finds that the cost-effectiveness of heat pumps depends on home-specific differences—with current Massachusetts rebates, owners of aging oil heating systems save $158 per year by choosing to replace with a heat pump instead of a gas furnace and central AC. For owners of gas heating systems, however, rebates for heat pumps are smaller than rebates for new gas furnaces, raising the relative cost of choosing heat pumps from $36 per year with no rebates to $73 per year with rebates. Even without rebates, the lifetime costs of heat pumps are only marginally more expensive than a gas furnace and central AC (see Figure above).

Link to Report (Updated July 2019)

Return to Our Work

Fixing Massachusetts' Gas Leaks Pays for Itself

Client: Gas Leak Allies

Authors: Bryndis Woods, Liz Stanton, PhD, and Eliandro Tavares

November 2018 - May 2019

Researcher Bryndis Woods, Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD, and Assistant Researcher Eliandro Tavares prepared a policy brief discussing natural gas leaks in Massachusetts and assessing the return on investment for gas leak repairs in the Commonwealth.

The policy brief estimates the payback period for repairing two volume-based categories of non-explosion-hazard gas leaks (called “Grade 3” leaks):

1. Leaks of Significant Environmental Impact (“Grade 3 SEI”): The top 10 percent of Grade 3 leaks, which is responsible for approximately 53 percent of lost gas.

2. Other Grade 3 leaks: The bottom 90 percent of Grade 3 leaks, which is responsible for 47 percent of lost gas.

The policy brief concludes that, while the average cost to fix a Grade 3 leak is approximately the same ($3,740) regardless of the leak volume, the cost of lost gas is not. Grade 3 SEI leaks cost $3,850 a year in lost gas, on average, while Other Grade 3 leaks cost $380. This ten-to-one difference in the cost of leaked gas means that SEI leaks pay for their own repairs ten times faster than other Grade 3 leaks; in 1 year versus 10 years, respectively (see Figure above).

This policy brief is the second of two AEC publications on behalf of Gas Leak Allies. Our April 2019 policy brief analyzed performance-based incentives that can align Massachusetts natural gas utilities' business interests with their responsibility to reduce emissions.

Link to Policy Brief

Return to Our Work

Avoided Emissions of 100,000 renters in MA 2019-2021 Energy Efficiency Plan

Photo from Schochet Companies

Client: Clean Water Action

Author: Ricardo Lopez, PhD

March 2019

On behalf of Clean Water Action, Senior Researcher Ricardo Lopez, PhD provided a memo that estimates how much energy could be saved from including 100,000 renters in Massachusetts’ 2019-2021 Energy Efficiency Plan programs.

Link to Memo

Return to Our Work

Comment on National Grid's Proposed Off-Peak Charging Rebate

Client: Green Energy Consumers Alliance (GECA)

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD, and Ricardo Lopez, PhD

March 2019

Applied Economics Clinic (AEC) replicated the calculations described in National Grid’s proposed off-peak charging rebate. AEC’s estimates of summer and winter off-peak charging rebates — using the methodology and data described in detail by National Grid — resulted in values similar but not identical to those presented by the Company. AEC concludes that the rebate levels proposed by National Grid represent a reflection of the reduced cost of service for off-peak charging and not a cross-subsidy. In addition, this comment raises several categories of potential additional peak to off-peak cost differentials and sources of charging revenue omitted in National Grid’s charging rebate methodology, including avoided transmission and distribution costs, avoided emissions costs, and funding for energy efficiency programs.

Link to Comment

Return to Our Work

Clinic Director Liz Stanton Presents at WNE Law Symposium

Authors: Liz Stanton, PhD

October 26, 2018

Clinic Director and Senior Economist Liz Stanton, PhD presented at the Western New England (WNE) Law Review Symposium on October 26, 2018. The Symposium aimed to facilitate conversation about how to build and reinforce smart, self-reliant and sustainable communities in the face of anthropocenic disruption. Dr. Stanton spoke about energy decisions made at the home, corporate, and regulatory levels.

Link to Presentation

Return to Our Work