Alternative Fuel Readiness Planning

Last year, in partnership with the Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA) and other key regional partners, SERC embarked on a two-year Alternative Fuels Readiness Planning (AFRP) project funded by the California Energy Commission (CEC). This project seeks to assess the potential for development of alternative transportation fuels such as electricity, hydrogen, and some biofuels in the North Coast region of California.

The goal of the SERC-led analytical work is to explore pathways for the North Coast region to achieve the 10% reduction in average fuel carbon intensity by 2020 mandated under California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). To this end, we have recently finished developing a simulation model, drawing on price data for fuels, vehicles, and distribution infrastructure, as well as analysis of regional transportation trends and fuel life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The model allows us to simulate the economic efficiency of GHG reduction via each fuel pathway individually as well as for a suite of technologies deployed to meet the LCFS target. It offers a nuanced understanding of the systems in question, enabling us to evaluate the impact of changing fuel and vehicle prices, electric grid carbon intensities, and other factors on the cost of GHG abatement through alternative fuel deployment.

Outputs of this analysis are being used by RCEA as it engages with both public and private sector transportation energy stakeholders across the region. This collaboration will lead to the development of a strategic plan for deploying a more sustainable transportation system in the North Coast of California.

Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) for each of the fuel pathways considered. Presented here is aggregate marginal cost above a conventional fuel/vehicle baseline. These costs include fuel cost as well as any incremental vehicle or distribution infrastructure cost required for a given fuel type.

Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) for each of the fuel pathways considered. Presented here is aggregate marginal cost above a conventional fuel/vehicle baseline. These costs include fuel cost as well as any incremental vehicle or distribution infrastructure cost required for a given fuel type.

 

Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Alternative Fuel Pathways

AFRP logo-wpThis summer, in partnership with the Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA) and other key regional partners, SERC embarked on a two-year Alternative Fuels Readiness Planning (AFRP) project funded by the California Energy Commission (CEC). This project seeks to assess the potential for development of alternative transportation fuels such as electricity, hydrogen, and some biofuels in the North Coast region of California. Each of the counties in the region (Humboldt, Mendocino, Del Norte, Trinity and Siskiyou) presents different challenges with respect to vehicle fleet, terrain and fuel demand. SERC is leading the analytical work, focusing on the costs and benefits of various alternative fuel pathways, and RCEA will lead the stakeholder engagement and strategic planning process.

The goal for the analytical work is to explore ways for the North Coast region to achieve the 10% reduction in fuel carbon intensity by 2020 mandated under California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). The optimal mix of alternative fuel vehicles and refueling infrastructure will depend on a variety of factors including commodity prices, policy implementation, carbon markets, electric grid mix, incentive structures, and fuel technology development. The simulation model being developed by SERC will enable local and state agencies and other partners to target incentives and investments in light of these realities.

Our first task was to figure out how much gasoline and diesel is being consumed on a yearly basis in each of the five counties. This involved collecting data from Air Quality Management Districts, CalTrans, the CEC, and other sources that track transportation markets and emissions. Additionally, we have catalogued existing alternative fueling stations (such as electric vehicle chargers and biodiesel fueling stations) in the region, and any measurable amounts of fuel they dispense.

With fuel quantities in hand, we will soon complete our simulation model, conduct the alternative fuels portfolio analysis, and then explore the potential impact of incentives on the adoption of alternative fuels. Ultimately, we will present the products of our work to regional stakeholders in the context of a strategic planning process. Using the stakeholders’ input, the team will set regional goals for alternative fuel adoption and define a roadmap to achieving a more sustainable transportation system.