Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization

Yongbin Ding; Mingquan Li; Ahmed Abdulla; Rui Shan; Ziyi Liu

doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.106967

Unintended consequences of curtailment cap policies on power system decarbonization

iScience. 2023 May 26;26(7):106967. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106967. eCollection 2023 Jul 21.

Authors

Yongbin Ding¹, Mingquan Li^{1

2}, Ahmed Abdulla³, Rui Shan⁴, Ziyi Liu⁵

Affiliations

¹ School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China.
² Laboratory for Low-carbon Intelligent Governance, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China.
³ Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada.
⁴ Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
⁵ Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), Beijing 100020, China.

Abstract

As countries pursue power system decarbonization, a well-intentioned strategy being pursued in jurisdictions like China is the strict integration target, often in the form of a curtailment cap. The effects of these curtailment caps have not been systematically studied. Here, we evaluate the effects of these caps on the decarbonization of one provincial power system using a capacity expansion model. Results reveal that curtailment caps yield deleterious effects that do not align with the stated goals of these policies. Capping curtailment significantly increases storage capacity (+43% with a 5% curtailment cap) and reduces renewable capacity (-17%). Even with the increase in flexible storage capacity, the policy still jeopardizes power system reliability by increasing occurrences of over or under generation. It also suppresses power generation from hydropower and reduces energy storage utilization while increasing fossil fuel utilization. Capping curtailment increases economic costs (+6% with a 5% curtailment cap) and CO₂ emissions (+7%).

Keywords: Energy management; Energy modeling; Energy policy.