Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-4
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 4.3.1.5 Options for adapting electricity systems to 1.5°C ==== <div id="section-4-3-1-5-block-1"></div> Climate change has started to disrupt electricity generation and, if climate change adaptation options are not considered, it is predicted that these disruptions will be lengthier and more frequent (Jahandideh-Tehrani et al., 2014; Bartos and Chester, 2015; Kraucunas et al., 2015; van Vliet et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r151|151]]</sup> . Adaptation would both secure vulnerable infrastructure and ensure the necessary generation capacity (Minville et al., 2009; Eisenack and Stecker, 2012; Schaeffer et al., 2012; Cortekar and Groth, 2015; Murrant et al., 2015; Panteli and Mancarella, 2015; Goytia et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r152|152]]</sup> . The literature shows ''high agreement'' that climate change impacts need to be planned for in the design of any kind of infrastructure, especially in the energy sector (Nierop, 2014) <sup>[[#fn:r153|153]]</sup> , including interdependencies with other sectors that require electricity to function, including water, data, telecommunications and transport (Fryer, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r154|154]]</sup> . Recent research has developed new frameworks and models that aim to assess and identify vulnerabilities in energy infrastructure and create more proactive responses (Francis and Bekera, 2014; Ouyang and Dueñas-Osorio, 2014; Arab et al., 2015; Bekera and Francis, 2015; Knight et al., 2015; Jeong and An, 2016; Panteli et al., 2016; Perrier, 2016; Erker et al., 2017; Fu et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r155|155]]</sup> . Assessments of energy infrastructure adaptation, while limited, emphasize the need for redundancy (Liu et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r156|156]]</sup> . The implementation of controllable and islandable microgrids, including the use of residential batteries, can increase resiliency, especially after extreme weather events (Qazi and Young Jr., 2014; Liu et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r157|157]]</sup> . Hybrid renewables-based power systems with non-hydro capacity, such as with high-penetration wind generation, could provide the required system flexibility (Canales et al., 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r158|158]]</sup> . Overall, there is ''high agreement'' that hybrid systems, taking advantage of an array of sources and time of use strategies, can help make electricity generation more resilient (Parkinson and Djilali, 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r159|159]]</sup> , given that energy security standards are in place (Almeida Prado et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r160|160]]</sup> . Interactions between water and energy are complex (IEA, 2017g) <sup>[[#fn:r161|161]]</sup> . Water scarcity patterns and electricity disruptions will differ across regions. There is ''high agreement'' that mitigation and adaptation options for thermal electricity generation (if that remains fitted with CCS) need to consider increasing water shortages, taking into account other factors such as ambient water resources and demand changes in irrigation water (Hayashi et al., 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r162|162]]</sup> . Increasing the efficiency of power plants can reduce emissions and water needs (Eisenack and Stecker, 2012; van Vliet et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r163|163]]</sup> , but applying CCS would increase water consumption (Koornneef et al., 2012) <sup>[[#fn:r164|164]]</sup> . The technological, economic, social and institutional feasibility of efficiency improvements is high, but insufficient to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C (van Vliet et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r165|165]]</sup> . In addition, a number of options for water cooling management systems have been proposed, such as hydraulic measures (Eisenack and Stecker, 2012) <sup>[[#fn:r166|166]]</sup> and alternative cooling technologies (Chandel et al., 2011; Eisenack and Stecker, 2012; Bartos and Chester, 2015; Murrant et al., 2015; Bustamante et al., 2016; van Vliet et al., 2016; Huang et al., 2017b) <sup>[[#fn:r167|167]]</sup> . There is ''high agreement'' on the technological and economic feasibility of these technologies, as their absence can severely impact the functioning of the power plant as well as safety and security standards. <div id="section-4-3-1-6"></div> <span id="carbon-dioxide-capture-and-storage-in-the-power-sector"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-4
(section)
Add languages
Add topic