© S.R.Connors–AGREA/LFEE/MIT ([email protected])12 Feb 2007 – pg. 1 MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment Scenario-Based Multi-Attribute Tradeoff.

© S.R.Connors–AGREA/LFEE/MIT ([email protected]) 12 Feb 2007 – pg. 1

MIT Laboratory forEnergy and the Environment

Scenario-BasedScenario-BasedMulti-AttributeMulti-Attribute

Tradeoff Analysis:Tradeoff Analysis:Vermont Public ServiceVermont Public Service

Board PresentationBoard Presentation

Stephen R. ConnorsAnalysis Group for Regional Energy Analysis

MIT Laboratory for Energy and the EnvironmentOne Amherst St. Room E40-465

Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USAemail: [email protected]


Multi-Attribute Tradeoffs

•MIT “Framework”– Originated in the late 1980s (IRP) // Not a “model”

› Designed as Extensive/Inclusive Approach forMulti-Stakeholder/Controversy-LadenDecision Environments

› Multi-Attribute ≠ Multi-Objective• Calculate every imaginable attribute (automatically)• Few “Decision Attributes”/Numerous

“Performance Attributes”

› Used in Two Modes:• Exploratory/Learning Mode [Joint Fact-Finding,

Rough Consensus on Long-Term “Vision”]

• Decision/Negotiated Settlement Mode [Chooseamong superior portfolios of option]


Whose Attributes?

•The “Usual Suspects”•The Black Sheep Attributes

› Rates vs. Bills vs. Revenues• Price/Rate Volatility

› Costs vs. Investments• Continuous vs. “Lumpy” Expenditures

› Three E’s: Efficiency, Equity, Employment

•The “Incalculable”› Those Darn “Externalities”› Indirect Economic Impacts› Those Pesky Markets


“Markets Are Our Friends”

Competition - Boston Style

Who’s in Charge?


You Want to Predict This?

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

$/MWh


• AGREA NIMBYs» NUMBY

Not Under My Backyard• Originally for pipelines• Equally good for

carbon sequestration

» NIMONot In My Ocean

• Ocean Disposal of CO2

» NOMH (‘gnome’)Not On My

Horizon• Originally conceived for

offshore wind• Equally good for

onshore-ridge wind

… And, the “Ability to Site”

• Common NIMBYs» NIMBY

Not in My Backyard

» NOTE / NOPENot Over

There EitherNot On

Planet Earth

» BANANABuild

Absolutely Nothing

Anywhere Near

Anybody


Direct Stakeholder Input

•A Structured Dialogue...Stakeholder Advisory Group

Energy ServiceCompanies

Generators

GridOperators

Aggregators

Regulators

LocalCommunities

Large IndustrySmall

Consumers EnvironmentalAdvocates

The Analysis Team

Communication among Constituencies inthe “Open Decision Environment”

Discussion of Issues,

Uncertainties, Options and

TradeoffResults

Study Scope and Scenario

Ranges

Results and Tradeoffs


Tradeoff Analysis (1)

• Scenario-Based Multi-AttributeTradeoff Analysis is a scenarioplanning approach developed tofacilitate dialogue and learningamong multi-stakeholder audiences.

»Large Number of Activities/Options(Multi-Option Strategies)

»Large Number of Uncertainties(Multiple Futures, Scientific Uncertainty)

»Large Number of Goal States/Attributes(Multiple Stakeholders, Conflicting Goals)


WorseBetterLow

High

"Costs"

(Program,Direct, Social)

"Environmental Performance"(SO2, NOx, TSP, CO 2, etc.)


•“Crafting” Scenarios toHelp Guide Policymakers

A multi-option strategy for a

given future is a scenario



•“Features”»Identifies “Good” and “Bad” Strategies»Identifies Competing/Complementary

Sets of Options»Recognizes Different “Deployment

Schedules” of Different Options»Use to Identify “Robust/Flexible”

versus “Optimal” Strategies»Helps Facilitate Stakeholder Dialogues


Shandong Province

• Population≈ 90

Million• Area ≈ Size

of Florida• Installed

Capacity (‘00)≈ 18.5

GW(mostly

coal)


Shandong Strategies

• Strategy Components (1008 strategies)»Existing Generation

› Additional Unit Retirements (2)› FGD Retrofits (2)› Use of “Prepared” Coals (3)

»New Generation› Baseload Technology Mix (7)› Extra-Regional Generation (2)

»End-Use Options› Peak Load Management (2)› Improved End-Use Efficiency (EUE) (3)

(Note: The first option in any option-set is bydefinition the “reference option.”)

Old“Clean”

Generation

New“Clean”

Generation

Old“Dirty”

Generation

New“Dirty”

Generation

Old“Dirty”Demand

New“Dirty”Demand

New“Clean”Demand

Old“Clean”Demand


Demand-SidePeak Load Mgt. (L) ++ - - - ≈

End-Use Efficiency (M,G) +++* ++ + +++ +++

New GenerationConv. Coal (C) ++ ≈ ≈ - –

AFBC (F) - ≈ - + –IGCC (L) + + + + –

Nat. Gas (M) + –* –* –* –Nuclear (N) + + + + +

Nuclear & Gas (D) + - - ≈ ++Nuclear, Gas, IGCC (T) - + + ++ +

Gas-by-Wire (A) – ≈ ≈ + +

PV Cost SO2 PM10 NOx CO2Existing Generation

Retirements (D) - ++ +++ + -FGD Retrofits (U) - + ≈ ≈ ≈

Prepared Coal (X,P) ≈ ++ +++ ≈ ≈

Tradeoff Analysis Results


Electric Service Costs Cumulative Stack EmissionsScenario PV Inf. Adj. Ave. Sulfur Partic. Nitrogen Carbon

Name (r=10) (r≈0) Bill Dioxide PM-10 Oxides DioxideScenario TRCn TRCi TRUSa SO2t PM10t NOxt CO2t

BOC-CONPAS-FIB 601.0 1415.1 0.373 12.89 4.69 11.05 3393.0BOX-CONPAM-FIB 570.7 1327.3 0.354 11.00 4.16 10.22 3071.2DOX-CONLAG-FIB 548.6 1267.9 0.340 10.85 3.06 9.73 2690.4BOX-LONLAM-FIB 568.1 1320.8 0.352 11.69 4.39 10.14 3044.5DOX-MONLAM-FIB 569.6 1331.7 0.353 13.22 3.23 11.18 3017.6BOC-NONLAS-FIB 597.0 1404.7 0.371 13.24 4.50 10.32 2943.7BOX-NONLAM-FIB 568.4 1321.2 0.352 11.16 3.93 9.55 2629.6BOX-NONLAG-FIB 552.6 1279.4 0.342 10.45 3.72 8.52 2243.3DOX-TONLAG-FIB 553.7 1284.5 0.343 8.76 2.73 7.74 2285.8DUX-DONLAG-FIB 552.7 1282.7 0.343 9.47 2.88 8.70 2272.1

(NPV-1999¥B) (1999¥B) (¥/kWh)

Percent Change from BOC-CONPAS-FIBBOX-CONPAM-FIB -5.0 -6.2 -5.2 -14.6 -11.3 -7.5 -9.5DOX-CONLAG-FIB -8.7 -10.4 -8.9 -15.8 -34.7 -11.9 -20.7BOX-LONLAM-FIB -5.5 -6.7 -5.6 -9.3 -6.3 -8.3 -10.3DOX-MONLAM-FIB -5.2 -5.9 -5.3 2.5 -31.1 1.2 -11.1BOC-NONLAS-FIB -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 2.7 -4.0 -6.5 -13.2BOX-NONLAM-FIB -5.4 -6.6 -5.6 -13.4 -16.3 -13.6 -22.5BOX-NONLAG-FIB -8.1 -9.6 -8.2 -18.9 -20.7 -22.9 -33.9DOX-TONLAG-FIB -7.9 -9.2 -8.0 -32.0 -41.9 -29.9 -32.6DUX-DONLAG-FIB -8.0 -9.4 -8.2 -26.5 -38.6 -21.3 -33.0

(Million Tonnes)

So, What Does It Cost?


• For the Strategy with Prepared Coal in Existing Units,Existing Unit Retirements and FGD Retrofits, Aggressive(20%) End-Use Efficiency, Peak Load Managementand New Conventional Coal, Nuclear and Natural GasGeneration

Ann. SO2 & PM10 Emissions

QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 20240

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Small Large New


2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 20240

50

100

150

200

250

300

Small Large New

<- Sulfur Reductions from Fuel Switch(from Reference Strategy) <- PM Reductions from Fuel Switch

Reductions from Fuel Switch, End-Use Efficiency & New Generation Choice ->

Reductions from Fuel Switch, End-Use Efficiency & New Generation Choice ->

Reference Future


Key Results (Shandong)

• Significant cost-effective opportunities existfor reducing power plant criteria pollutants(SO2, PM, NOx), and reducing increasesof greenhouse gas emissions (CO2).

• The best performing strategies were acombination of the following options:

» Use of prepared coal to reduce PM and SO2

» Select retirement or emissions retrofits ofexisting generation

» Implementation of peak load management andend-use efficiency programs

» Addition of non-carbon emitting generation technologies

» Do not forget the fuel supply infrastructure and markets



u

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

ww

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

76.0

78.0

2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600

Cumulative Smokestack CO2 Emissions(Million Tonnes, 2000-2024)

No EUEor LM

LM

ModerateEUE

ModerateEUE & LM

AggressiveEUE

AggressiveEUE & LM

Reference Future

<- with Nuclear | without Nuclear ->

EUE = End-Use EfficiencyLM = Peak Load Mgt.

Demand-Side and CO2



u

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

76.0

78.0

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Reference Future

Cumulative Smokestack Particulate Emissions (PM10)(Million Tonnes, 2000-2024)

<- Coal Switch & Retire/Switch All/Switch Only Existing/Only Retire/No Changes ->

ReferenceStrategy

Existing Units and PM10


What’s Required?

• Develop an “infrastructuremanagement” perspective.What is the resulting “vision?”

• Explore options in greater detail• Develop “in-depth” knowledge of

energy consumption patterns andrenewable energy resources

• Identify and implement “essential” robust options, and develop“promising” future flexible

options.


Now Looking at Tougher Options

• Technology Development,Deployment and Use

• Renewable Resources…› Non-dispatchable› Variable across multiple time scales› Temporal dynamics interact with other important

dynamics (markets, consumer behavior)

• Decentralized Decisions› Choice and use of distributed generation› Energy efficiency options that use information

technology to reduced demand (smart loads)› Influenced by Market Prices and other Situational Aspects

• Example: Wind Resource Dynamics


Wind in Space and Time

Source: Mass Renewable Energy Trust TrueWind Solutions

ElectricityDemand

Generationfrom Wind


Logan

Hotel

Buzzards BayBoston

Nantucket

Seasonal & Daily Variability• Generation Summed by Month and Hour-of-Day (2004)


One Site for Many Years…

• Nantucket (Sleigh Ride?)


Operating Modes and“Resource” Portfolios

• Renewable Resource Variability› Wind and Sun (Magnitude and Timing)

› Rainfall (Hydropower, Biomass)

• Fuel Markets› Fuel Prices/Price Differentials (esp. Natural Gas)› Infrastructure Investments (Pipelines/Storage/LNG)

• Conventional Generation› Nuclear Availability, Hydro Potential› Power Market Structure (Capacity Markets, Bid Rules)

› Power Grid Operations (Reliability/Contingency Practices)

• Energy Demands› Demand Growth – Relative to Supply Growth› Heating Degree Days/Cooling Degree Days


WorseBetterLow

High

"Costs"

(Program,Direct, Social)

"Environmental Performance"(SO2, NOx, TSP, CO 2, etc.)

Identifying Robust Strategies

•A Robust Strategy has Robustand Flexible Options

Commonalities and Differences


Closing Observations/Questions

•At Which Stage Are You?» Short/Medium-Term in the

Context of a Long-TermPlan/Vision/Whatever

» Are All the Major Factors BeenIncluded/Considered?

» Have the Major Organizational/Institutional Factors BeenOverlooked? (Brains and Bodies)


Have We Had It Too Easy?

• We need to develop the information, tools,implementable visions, and the policies andpeople to realize them.

© S.R.Connors–AGREA/LFEE/MIT ([email protected])12 Feb 2007 – pg. 1 MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment Scenario-Based Multi-Attribute Tradeoff.

Documents

scenario slide

coal slide

mwh slide

multioption strategy

tradeoff analysis results

reference option

connors analysis group

bad strategies