The Regional Energy & Water Supply Scenarios (REWSS) model, part II: Case studies in Pennsylvania and Arizona

Abstract Water and energy are interconnected resources that face regional supply limitations and contribute to environmental issues such as climate change. Pennsylvania and Arizona are creating policies to steer large transitions in their energy and water sources, respectively. This paper provides case studies using the newly developed Regional Energy & Water Supply Scenarios (REWSS) model to explore potential impacts of different pathways in these two states. Part I of this work discusses model structure, procedure, and validation. Pennsylvania has become a major producer of shale gas, but the potential for greenhouse gas emissions reductions from shale gas are uncertain. Results show only small decreases in GHG emissions if shale gas is used for electricity due to limited reductions in transportation and heating-related emissions. PA results also highlight potential water for energy issues around biofuels if irrigated feedstocks are used. Arizona faces water supply issues due to population growth and overused groundwater. Scenarios examined focus on replacing groundwater with imports or desalination. AZ results show that the use of desalination could show marginal increases in GHGs and energy consumption (2%), but the widespread deployment of solar power to offset additional GHGs would likely have a high upfront energetic cost.

[1]  Vikas Khanna,et al.  Process based life-cycle assessment of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  Melissa M. Bilec,et al.  The Regional Energy & Water Supply Scenarios (REWSS) model, Part I: Framework, procedure, and validation , 2014 .

[3]  P. Alvarez,et al.  The water footprint of biofuels: a drink or drive issue? , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Nancy L. Barber,et al.  Estimated use of water in the United States in 2005 , 2009 .

[5]  K. Caldeira,et al.  Greenhouse gases, climate change and the transition from coal to low-carbon electricity , 2012 .

[6]  M. McElroy,et al.  The impact of Production Tax Credits on the profitable production of electricity from wind in the U.S , 2011 .

[7]  J. Veil.  Water management technologies used by Marcellus Shale Gas Producers. , 2010 .

[8]  Gabriel Gallagher,et al.  Biomass for electricity generation , 2001 .

[9]  D. Lettenmaier,et al.  The Effects of Climate Change on the Hydrology and Water Resources of the Colorado River Basin , 2004 .

[10]  James J Winebrake,et al.  Greater focus needed on methane leakage from natural gas infrastructure , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Albert Germain,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Water: From the pumping station to the wastewater treatment plant (9 pp) , 2007 .

[12]  Jacinto F. Fabiosa,et al.  Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change , 2008, Science.

[13]  Timothy J. Skone,et al.  Water: A critical resource in the thermoelectric power industry , 2008 .

[14]  C. Weber,et al.  Life cycle carbon footprint of shale gas: review of evidence and implications. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Varun,et al.  LCA of renewable energy for electricity generation systems—A review , 2009 .

[16]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  The ecoinvent Database: Overview and Methodological Framework (7 pp) , 2005 .

[17]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations , 2012, Nature.

[18]  Vasilis Fthenakis,et al.  Land use and electricity generation: A life-cycle analysis , 2009 .

[19]  Nate Blair,et al.  U.S. Renewable Energy Technical Potentials: A GIS-Based Analysis , 2012 .

[20]  Carey W. King,et al.  Water intensity of transportation. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.