Editing Hydraulic fracturing subsidies literature review

{{MY5490 notice}}

{{Literature review notice}}

{{Subpages menu}}

== Literature Review ==

==== Trashing the Planet for Natural Gas: Shale Gas Development Threatens Freshwater Sources, Likely Escalates Climate Destabilization ''Capitalism Nature Socialism''21.(4) ====

'''Abstract''': In a stunning irony of capitalist greed, the new era of dirty fossil fuel extraction now threatens the water supply of the financial capital of the world. That's because most of the bottom third of New York State—including the New York City watershed west of the Hudson River—sits atop the Marcellus Shale, a vast expanse of sedimentary rock several thousand feet below the surface of the land extending into eight states.19 In 2008, the amount of natural gas in the Marcellus was estimated at as much as 516 trillion cubic feet,up from previous U.S. Geological Survey estimates in 2002 of just 1.3 trillion cubic feet.The new estimate has prompted some to dub the Marcellus ''the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.

* This paper is important because of the data shared such as 1,000 cases of contamination in Colorado, New Mexico, Alabama, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Giving example about residents being able to light their tap water on fire from methane seepage into their water supply is increasingly common in drilling areas.
* In addition the paper focuses on policy. Specifically subsidy to Hydraulic Fracturing, the author mentioned that the US gov encourage gas drilling with more than $13.5 billion of subsidies, through Energy Policy Act.
* Finally, the paper highlighted the international component in the US natural gas market.

==== Canes, M. E.(2012). Changes in the Fuel Mix Used to Produce Power in the U.S.George C. Marshall Institute Arlington, Va. ====

'''Abstract''': Over the years, there have been significant changes in the fuel mix used to generate electricity in the United States. Generally, this mix has become less carbon-intensive, relying less on coal and more on natural gas and renewable sources. Nevertheless,
concerns over the environment and a desire to promote the emergence of "clean energy" industries have led a number of people to advocate policy measures to induce, if not compel, power suppliers in the United States to alter their fuel mix away from
fossil fuels and towards non-carbon sources. For example, many states have established Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPSs), which compel power suppliers to utilize minimum percentages of renewable fuels that usually rise over time. At the federal level, President Obama has proposed a 'clean energy standard' and Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico), Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, recently introduced a RPS bill that would compel power suppliers everywhere in the country to meet that standard. In this paper, we examine what actually has been happening over time with respect to the power producing fuel mix in the United States. The purpose is to see whether such mix already is being shaped by market forces that are driving it towards lower carbon content. If so, question arises whether there is any need for policy measures such as RPSs or subsidies for non-carbon sources. Further, as mandates or subsidies have substantial costs, question arises whether these costs are justified. Our findings are that: The U.S. power generation fuel mix has been falling in carbon intensity for the past 50 years.

* This trend towards a less carbon intensive fuel mix has accelerated in recent years as the price of natural gas has fallen relative to that of coal.
* Federal projections of the power production fuel mix into the future suggest the trend will continue for many years.
* Though virtually all forms of energy are subsidized by the government to some degree, renewable sources have received very large subsidies per unit of output in recent years, likely affecting power generation choices at the margin.
* Subsidies and mandates impose substantial costs on taxpayers and on ratepayers. They also induce rent-seeking behavior by suppliers which impose deadweight costs on society and which breed cynicism about the U.S. system of government and its relation to economic activity. Given continuing market trends, no expansion of such mandates or subsidies is justified. Indeed, with the exception of basic research, a relaxation of mandates and a reduction in energy subsidies if not their complete disappearance would be the more desirable course of action.

==== The Constitutional Environmental Human Right to Water: An Economic Model of the Potential Negative Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Quantity and Quality in Pennsylvania ====

'''Abstract''': The process of hydraulic fracturing (HF) for natural gas leads to two potential negative externalities: (1) a reduction in the quantity of existing drinking water, and (2) a reduction in the quality of existing drinking water. These two externalities can further conspire to lead to a broader problem: an inability to full the human right to (clean or pure) water. Although the United States (US) Constitution does not grant individuals a human right to clean water, the Constitution of Pennsylvania does within Section 27. While US reliance on natural gas and the prevalence of HF as a method for procuring natural gas both increase, the two externalities may lead to actual human rights violations, especially in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania. This paper develops an economic model of the two externalities to: (1) demonstrate how violations
of both the quantity and quality of available drinking water can occur; and (2) offer a scale policy to address the violations (i.e., a Pigovian Tax) , where a single tax on natural gas production is capable of addressing both externalities. In keeping with the current case law interpretation of Section 27 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, a due standard of care negligence rule within a unilateral-care accident model is developed and compared to the Pigovian Tax. Depending on the nature of the market demand
and supply curves for natural gas, the results indicate that the incidence of the Pigovian Tax is not fully carried by the producers while the due standard of care rule is imposed entirely on the producers (i.e., injurers). In either case, the number of producers is an important consideration for fulfillment of the human right to water.

==== [http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=SPE-121038-MS Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs<ref name="J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne, ">J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne (2009). Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs ''Society of Petroleum Engineers''</ref>] ====

'''Abstract''':Exploration, drilling and production of shale gas plays such as the Barnett, Fayetteville, and Haynesville have transformed the unconventional gas industry. These and other existing and developing plays have had unimaginable economic impacts to many regions, created tens of thousands of jobs, and have generated royalty payments to a variety of state and local governments as well as many individuals. At the core of shale gas development are two key technologies: horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Techniques used to hydraulically fracture horizontal wells completed in shale reservoirs often require larger volumes of fracturing fluid than might be common for conventional, vertical well stimulations. The rapid development of shale gas across the country has created concerns on issues such as the use of infrastructure and environmental impacts. Specifically, the common practice of hydraulic fracturing of these shales has attracted critical interest regarding risks potentially posed to groundwater and surface water. This paper will present a summary and evaluation of the environmental implications of hydraulic fracturing in shale gas reservoirs, with examples from multiple basins.

* The paper gives very detailed engineering background in hydraulic fracturing process and the fracturing fluids additives.

==== The technical, geographical, and economic feasibility for solar energy to supply the energy needs of the US. ''Energy Policy''. 37. (2) 387-399.] ====

'''Abstract''': So far, solar energy has been viewed as only a minor contributor in the energy mixture of the US due to cost and intermittency constraints. However, recent drastic cost reductions in the production of photovoltaics (PV) pave the way for enabling this technology to become cost competitive with fossil fuel energy generation. We show that with the right incentives, cost competitiveness with grid prices in the US (e.g., 6–10 US¢/kWh) can be attained by 2020. The intermittency problem is solved by integrating PV with compressed air energy storage (CAES) and by extending the thermal storage capability in concentrated solar power (CSP). We used hourly load data for the entire US and 45-year solar irradiation data from the southwest region of the US, to simulate the CAES storage requirements, under worst weather conditions. Based on expected improvements of established, commercially available PV, CSP, and CAES technologies, we show that solar energy has the technical, geographical, and economic potential to supply 69% of the total electricity needs and 35% of the total (electricity and fuel) energy needs of the US by 2050. When we extend our scenario to 2100, solar energy supplies over 90%, and together with other renewables, 100% of the total US energy demand with a corresponding 92% reduction in energy-related carbon dioxide emissions compared to the 2005 levels.

* The paper gives an economic assessment some historical data of CSP systems in the US.

==== Human health risk assessment of air emissions from development of unconventional natural gas resources, ''Science of the Total Environment''. 424. 79-87 ====

'''Abstract''': Technological advances (e.g. directional drilling, hydraulic fracturing), have led to increases in unconventional natural gas development (NGD), raising questions about health impacts. We estimated health risks for exposures to air emissions from a NGD project in Garfield County, Colorado with the objective of supporting risk prevention recommendations in a health impact assessment (HIA). The methods. We used EPA guidance to estimate chronic and subchronic non-cancer hazard indices and cancer risks from exposure to hydrocarbons for two populations: (1) residents living >½ mile from wells and (2) residents living ≤½ mile from wells. Results,residents living ≤½ mile from wells are at greater risk for health effects from NGD than are residents living >½ mile from wells. Subchronic exposures to air pollutants during well completion activities present the greatest potential for health effects. The subchronic non-cancer hazard index (HI) of 5 for residents ≤½ mile from wells was driven primarily by exposure to trimethylbenzenes, xylenes, and aliphatic hydrocarbons. Chronic HIs were 1 and 0.4. for residents ≤½ mile from wells and >½ mile from wells, respectively. Cumulative cancer risks were 10 in a million and 6 in a million for residents living ≤½ mile and >½ mile from wells, respectively, with benzene as the major contributor to the risk.

* This is a very recent study; I will use some of the data to provide a scientific perspective to the potential health risks associated with development of unconventional natural gas.

==== The Future of Natural Gas: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study ====

'''Abstract''': The Future of Natural Gas is the fourth in a series of MIT multidisciplinary reports examining the role of various energy sources that may be important for meeting future demand under carbon dioxide emissions constraints. In each case, we explore the steps needed to enable competitiveness in a future marketplace conditioned by a CO2 emissions price. Often overlooked in past debates about the future of energy in the U.S., natural gas is finding its place at the heart of the energy discussion. Natural gas is a major fuel for multiple end uses — electricity, industry, heating — and is increasingly discussed as a potential pathway to reduced oil dependence for transportation. In addition, the realization over the last few years that the producible unconventional gas resource in the U.S. is very large has intensified the discussion about natural gas as a "bridge" to a low-carbon future.

* Abundant global natural gas resources imply greatly expanded natural gas use with especially large growth in electricity generation.
* Natural gas will assume an increasing share of the U.S. energy mix over the next several decades, with the large unconventional resource playing a key role.
* A concerted coordinated effort by industry and government, both state and Federal should be organized so as to minimize the environmental impacts of shale gas development through both research and regulation. Transparency is key, both for fracturing operations and for water management. Better communication of oil- and gas-field best practices should be facilitated. Integrated regional water usage and disposal plans and disclosure of hydraulic fracture fluid components should be required.

==== What is the True Cost of Hydraulic Fracturing? Incorporating Negative Externalities into the Cost of America's Latest Energy Alternative. ''Journal of Environmental Sciences Program''. 2,1st Edition, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC. ====

'''Abstract''': Decreased technological costs and increased efficiency of horizontal drilling has made obtaining natural gas from shale deposits through hydraulic fracturing a viable economic option. However, current estimates of per kWh costs to obtain natural gas through this method do not account for increased environmental risks. By incorporating damages from air and water pollution, the true cost of hydraulic fracturing can be assessed. Results indicate air pollution from volatile organic compounds (VOCs) is higher for unconventional natural gas versus conventional natural gas. Without potential water pollution taken into account, the best estimate levelized cost of electricity for unconventional natural gas is $13.99/kWh, $1.87/kWh lower than that of conventional natural gas and $0.80/kWh higher than the best estimate for wind energy. Difference in cost between conventional and unconventional natural gas is largely due to funds spent procuring and protecting natural gas from other countries. The water pollution externality is estimated by comparing the total cost of replacing the water of all of the citizens in the water basin overlying the shale play to the total possible number of kWh energy that could be extracted from that shale for five shale plays. Replacement of water for 10 years results in an externality larger than the security cost for the Eagle Ford shale, and about half of the security cost for the Marcellus and Barnett shales. The water externality for the same period is smaller than the security externality for the Fayetteville and Green River shales. More studies are needed to determine the cause of the excess air pollution and to limit the range of water externalities.

* The emission factor for volatile organic compounds from unconventional shale gas extraction is more than 145 times higher than that for conventional gas (0.30633 lb/MMBtu vs. 0.0021 lb/MMBtu). Associated best estimate externality costs vary from 0.0048 ¢/kWh. Levelized costs of unconventional natural gas without incorporating the water externality vary from 8.83 – 25.36 $/ kWh, while levelized costs of conventional natural gas vary from 11.16 – 29.84 $/ kWh
* Water externalities vary between shale plays due to differences in the ratio between the possible amount of energy that could be extracted from the shale play and the number of people dependent upon connected water supplies. Costs for water replacement alone are substantially lower than costs due to water transport and greenhouse gas externalities from burning diesel.

==== The future of U.S. natural gas production, use, and trade ====

'''Abstract''': Two computable general equilibrium models, one global and the other providing U.S. regional detail, are applied to analysis of the future of U.S. natural gas. The focus is on uncertainties including the scale and cost of gas resources, the costs of competing technologies, the pattern of greenhouse gas mitigation, and the evolution of global natural gas markets. Results show that the outlook for gas over the next several decades is very favorable. In electric generation, given the unproven and relatively high cost of other low-carbon generation alternatives, gas is likely the preferred alternative to coal. A broad GHG pricing policy would increase gas use in generation but reduce use in other sectors, on balance increasing its role from present levels. The shale gas resource is a major contributor to this optimistic view of the future of gas. Gas can be an effective bridge to a lower emissions future, but investment in the development of still lower CO2 technologies remains an important priority. International gas resources may well prove to be less costly than those in the U.S., except for the lowest-cost domestic shale resources, and the emergence of an integrated global gas market could result in significant U.S. gas imports.

* The paper concluded that an exploitation of shale resources will require some expansion in the long-distance pipeline network, primarily to accommodate shipment of gas out of the South Central region to areas other than the North East, though the imposition of emissions mitigation reduces the need such changes in this system.
* Also, gas competes most strongly in the electric power sector, especially under Climate Policy, because it has much lower CO2 emissions than coal. Thus in the electric generation sector natural gas is a bridge fuel under Climate Policy, providing a cleaner alternative to coal. With continued tightening of CO2 constraints beyond 2050, however, the CO2 emissions from unconventional gas generation eventually will require an investment in the development of lowe CO2 technologies.

==== [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511001893 Regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale gas plays: The case of Texas<ref name=" R Dianne ">R Dianne.(2011) Regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale gas plays: The case of Texas ''Energy policy''. 39 (5)2974-2981.</ref>] ====

'''Abstract''': The ability to economically produce natural gas from unconventional shale gas reservoirs has been made possible recently through the application of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. This new technique has radically changed the energy future of the United States. The U.S. has shifted from a waning producer of natural gas to a growing producer. The Energy Information Administration forecasts that by 2035 nearly half of U.S. natural gas will come from shale gas. Texas is a major player in these developments. Of the eight states and coastal areas that account for the bulk of U.S. gas, Texas has the largest proved reserves. Texas' Barnett Shale already produces six percent of the continental U.S.' gas and exploration of Texas' other shale gas regions is just beginning. Shale gas production is highly controversial, in part because of environmental concerns. Some U.S. states have put hydraulic fracturing moratoriums in place because of fear of drinking water contamination. The federal government has gotten involved and some states, like Texas, have accused it of overreaching. The contention over shale gas drilling in the U.S. may be a bellwether for other parts of the world that are now moving forward with their own shale gas production.

* The paper covers the environmental impacts associated with Hydraulic Fracturing & policy related: such as
* Toxic Chemicals and Radioactive Materials
* Sources of Water Contamination
* Sources of Air Contamination

==== Improved Attribution of Climate Forcing to Emissions] ====

'''Abstract''': Evaluating multicomponent climate change mitigation strategies requires knowledge of the diverse direct and indirect effects of emissions. Methane, ozone, and aerosols are linked through atmospheric chemistry so that emissions of a single pollutant can affect several species. We calculated atmospheric composition changes, historical radiative forcing, and forcing per unit of emission due to aerosol and tropospheric ozone precursor emissions in a coupled composition-climate model. We found that gas-aerosol interactions substantially alter the relative importance of the various emissions. In particular, methane emissions have a larger impact than that used in current carbon-trading schemes or in the Kyoto Protocol. Thus, assessments of multigas mitigation policies, as well as any separate efforts to mitigate warming from short-lived pollutants, should include gas-aerosol interactions.

==== Willingness to pay for electricity sourced from natural gas extracted using hydraulic fracturing : location and preference heterogeneity] ====

'''Abstract''':This study uses a choice experiment to measure the welfare impacts of electricity generated by natural gas from hydraulic fracturing. Our model estimates how proximity and location to drill sites and the Marcellus Shale impact willingness to pay. Our results from an Internet survey of New York State residents indicate that residents exhibit, on average, a negative willingness to pay for that electricity source. In addition, all subsamples of residents incur disutility on average, but those who live in counties within the Marcellus Shale have the greatest disutility. New York State residents' mean WTP ranged from a decrease in their monthly electric bill of $22 to $48 depending on proximity and whether they resided in a county within the Marcellus Shale Play. For comparison, the average electric bill was $124, so the negative impacts of hydraulic fracturing are perceived to be substantial by New York State residents.

==== Addressing the Environmental Risks from Shale Gas Development< ====

'''Abstract''':This briefing paper, part of an on-going series on the role of natural gas in the future energy economy, provides an overview of how horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing are used to extract shale gas, examines the environmental risks, associated with shale gas development, and provides an overview of the industry best practices and government regulations that are needed if shale gas is to contribute its full potential to help build a low-carbon economy in the years ahead.

==== Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing ====

'''Abstract''':Directional drilling and hydraulic-fracturing technologies are dramatically increasing natural-gas extraction. In aquifers overlying the Marcellus and Utica shale formations of northeastern Pennsylvania and upstate New York, we document systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale-gas extraction. In active gas-extraction areas (one or more gas wells within 1 km), average and maximum methane concentrations in drinking-water wells increased with proximity to the nearest gas well and were 19.2 and 64 mg CH4 L-1 (n = 26), a potential explosion hazard; in contrast, dissolved methane samples in neighboring nonextraction sites (no gas wells within 1 km) within similar geologic formations and hydrogeologic regimes averaged only 1.1 mg L-1 (P < 0.05; n = 34). Average δ13C-CH4 values of dissolved methane in shallow groundwater were significantly less negative for active than for nonactive sites (-37 ± 7‰ and -54 ± 11‰, respectively; P < 0.0001). These δ13C-CH4 data, coupled with the ratios of methane-to-higher-chain hydrocarbons, and δ2H-CH4 values, are consistent with deeper thermogenic methane sources such as the Marcellus and Utica shales at the active sites and matched gas geochemistry from gas wells nearby. In contrast, lower-concentration samples from shallow groundwater at nonactive sites had isotopic signatures reflecting a more biogenic or mixed biogenic/thermogenic methane source. We found no evidence for contamination of drinking-water samples with deep saline brines or fracturing fluids. We conclude that greater stewardship, data, and—possibly—regulation are needed to ensure the sustainable future of shale-gas extraction and to improve public confidence in its use.

==== [http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es903811p Natural Gas Plays in the Marcellus Shale: Challenges and Potential Opportunities<ref name="Kargbo DM,Wilhelm RG,Campbell DJ. ">Kargbo DM,Wilhelm RG,Campbell DJ. (2010) Natural gas plays in the Marcellus shale: Challenges and potential opportunities. Environ Sci Technol 44:5679–5684.</ref>] ====

'''Abstract''':This article is focused on the Marcellus Shale because it is the most expansive shale gas in play in the U.S. The Marcellus Shale, which is Devonian age (416−359.2 My), belongs to a group of black, organic-rich shales that are common constituents of sedimentary deposits. In shale deposition, the clay-sized grains tend to lie flat as the sediments accumulate. Pressurized compaction results in flat sheet-like deposits with thin laminar bedding that lithifies into thinly layered shale rock. Natural gas is formed as the organic materials in these deposits degrade anaerobically. The Marcellus Shale gas is mostly thermogenic, with enough heat and pressure to produce primarily dry natural gas. Covering an area of 240,000 km2 (95,000 mi2), it underlies a large portion of Pennsylvania, east of West Virginia, and parts of New York, Ohio, and Maryland (Figure 1). Recent production data suggest that recoverable reserves from Marcellus Shale could be as large as 489 Tcf

==== [http://www.sciencemag.org/content/305/5686/968.full.pdf Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies<ref name="Pacala S,Socolow R ">Pacala S,Socolow R (2004) Stabilization wedges: Solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305:968–972.</ref>] ====

'''Abstract''':Humanity already possesses the fundamental scientific, technical, and industrial know-how to solve the carbon and climate problem for the next half-century. A portfolio of technologies now exists to meet the world's energy needs over the next 50 years and limit atmospheric CO2 to a trajectory that avoids a doubling of the preindustrial concentration. Every element in this portfolio has passed beyond the laboratory bench and demonstration project; many are already implemented somewhere at full industrial scale. Although no element is a credible candidate for doing the entire job (or even half the job) by itself, the portfolio as a whole is large enough that not every element has to be used.

==== [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988311001071 Decarbonization of the U.S. electricity sector: Are state energy policy portfolios the solution?<ref name="Sanya,C. ">Sanya,C. (2011). Decarbonization of the U.S. electricity sector: Are state energy policy portfolios the solution?. ''Energy Economics'' 33(5).<ref>] ====

'''Abstract''': State governments have taken the lead on U.S. energy and climate policy. It is not yet clear, however, whether state energy policy portfolios can generate results in a similar magnitude or manner to their presumed carbon mitigation potential. This article seeks to address this lack of policy evidence and contribute empirical insights on the carbon mitigation effects of state energy portfolios within the U.S. electricity sector. Using a dynamic, long-term electricity dispatch model with U.S. power plant, utility, and transmission and distribution data between 2010 and 2030, this analysis builds a series of state-level policy portfolio scenarios and performs a comparative scenario analysis. Results reveal that state policy portfolios have modest to minimal carbon mitigation effects in the long run if surrounding states do not adopt similar portfolios as well. The difference in decarbonization potential between isolated state policies and larger, more coordinated policy efforts is due in large part to carbon leakage, which is the export of carbon intensive fossil fuel-based electricity across state lines. Results also confirm that a carbon price of $50/metric ton CO2e can generate substantial carbon savings. Although both policy options – an energy policy portfolio or a carbon price – are effective at reducing carbon emissions in the present analysis, neither is as effective alone as when the two strategies are combined.

==== [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421501000751 Strategies for cost-effective carbon reductions: a sensitivity analysis of alternative scenarios<ref name="Etan Gumerman, Jonathan G. Koomey, Marilyn A. Brown. ">Etan Gumerman, Jonathan G. Koomey, Marilyn A. Brown. (2001). Strategies for cost-effective carbon reductions: a sensitivity analysis of alternative scenarios . ''Energy Economics'' 33(5).<ref>] ====

'''Abstract''': Analyses of alternative futures often present results for a limited set of scenarios, with little, if any, sensitivity analysis to identify the factors affecting the scenario results. This approach creates an artificial impression of certainty associated with the scenarios considered, and inhibits understanding of the underlying forces. This paper summarizes the economic and carbon savings sensitivity analysis completed for the Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future study (Interlaboratory Working Group, 2000). Its 19 sensitivity cases provide insight into the costs and carbon-reduction impacts of a carbon permit trading system, demand-side efficiency programs, and supply-side policies. Impacts under different natural gas and oil price trajectories are also examined. The results provide compelling evidence that policy opportunities exist in the United States to reduce carbon emissions and save society money.

==== [http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/state_local_activities/pdfs/43512.pdf State Clean Energy Practices: Renewables Portfolio Standard<ref name="Hurlbut. D ">Hurlbut. D. (2008). ''State Clean Energy Practices: Renewables Portfolio Standard'' (Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory).<ref>] ====

'''Abstract''': The State Clean Energy Policies Analysis (SCEPA) project is supported by the Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program within the Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. This project seeks to quantify the impacts of existing state policies, and to identify crucial policy attributes and their potential applicability to other states. The goal is to assist states in determining which clean energy policies or policy portfolios will best accomplish their environmental, economic, and security goals. Experts from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Interenergy Solutions are implementing this work, with state officials and policy experts providing extensive input and review. This report focuses on renewable portfolio standard (RPS) policies, which are being analyzed as part of this project.

==== [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421510008670 Successful renewable energy development in a competitive electricity market: A Texas case study<ref name="Zarnikau. J.">Zarnikau. J. (2011). Successful renewable energy development in a competitive electricity market: a Texas case study. ''Energy Policy'' 39(7).<ref>] ====

'''Abstract''': The development of renewable energy in markets with competition at wholesale and retail levels poses challenges not present in areas served by vertically-integrated utilities. The intermittent nature of some renewable energy resources impact reliability, operations, and market prices, in turn affecting all market participants. Meeting renewable energy goals may require coordination among many market players. These challenges may be successfully overcome by imposing goals, establishing trading mechanisms, and implementing operational changes in competitive markets. This strategy has contributed to Texas' leadership among all US states in non-hydro renewable energy production. While Texas has been largely successful in accommodating over 9000 MW of wind power capacity, this extensive reliance upon wind power has also created numerous problems. Higher levels of operating reserves must now be procured. Market prices often go negative in the proximity of wind farms. Inaccurate wind forecasts have led to reliability problems. Five billion dollars in transmission investment will be necessary to facilitate further wind farm projects. Despite these costs, wind power is generally viewed as a net benefit.

<references />

{{Page data
| organizations = MOST
| authors = User:Raheel
}}