Fossil Gas Shortage Tells Us Alaska Should Turn to Renewable Energy – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

This is an interesting story, and I have to say I knew nothing about this region’s electricity grid before today. The US Department of Energy has the full, long story, but I’m going to summarize it and cut to the chase in parts. The focus is Alaska’s Railbelt electric grid, which is facing a fossil gas (aka “natural gas”) challenge and is being advised to turn to renewables.

First of all, a few facts for those of us unfamiliar with Alaska:

• Railbelt serves 75% of the state’s population.
• Cook Inlet is the source of fossil gas that is primarily what powers the grid (~70% of it).
• Those fossil gas reserves are declining.
• Starting in 2027, a serious shortfall is expected.
• Though, impacts are already cutting very close to home.
• Utilities are now exploring options to import gas, but that would also “require building import terminals and expanded storage capacity to meet peak and seasonal demand.” Expensive.

Research, though, is making it clear that Alaska and the Railbelt grid could benefit greatly from a more diversified, clean, renewable energy path forward. Two studies have been conducted on the matter, resulting in the ACEP Railbelt Decarbonization Study and the NREL 80% Renewable Portfolio Standard. They show “how Alaska could stabilize energy costs, develop local resources, reduce reliance on high-cost imported gas, and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions.” The studies come to different conclusions, but both identify solar and wind as clear paths forward.

“I’ve written previously about the NREL study, where I highlight their result that investing in wind and solar projects would minimize Railbelt energy costs. The ACEP study is somewhat less optimistic: it finds clean energy costs are between 5% less expensive and 30% more expensive than relying primarily on gas imports,” Dr. Levi Kilcher, Senior Energy Advisor for the Arctic Energy Office, writes.

Both of the reports “tell us that wind and solar technologies are the most cost-effective clean energy solutions for the foreseeable future, and that these costs are competitive with conventional energy sources (gas imports) for Alaska’s Railbelt. [The reports] also agree that the lowest-cost scenario is one in which about 75–80% of Railbelt electricity comes from wind and solar. It is also unsurprising that the ACEP report’s costs are slightly higher, because that work explicitly accounts for the infrastructure costs necessary for maintaining grid stability.” It’s not shocking. Wind and solar power are the cheapest options for new power capacity around the world. “Also, they do other things that help society — cut CO2 emissions, provide more grid security, provide more grid stability, etc. How will the Railbet region respond? We’ll see.

“How much natural gas Alaska imports—and how much storage capacity is required—will ultimately depend on things like how much energy demand changes, how long gas production in Cook Inlet continues, whether a gas pipeline from the North Slope is built, how quickly local energy projects are built, and how quickly Alaskans install alternate heating sources—such as high-efficiency low-temperature heat pumps. In the meantime, caution in committing to long-term gas contracts will allow for flexibility to transition toward local energy sources more quickly.

“By investing in local energy projects now, the Railbelt can accomplish several major objectives at once: stabilize energy prices, improve energy security, and foster local economic growth. The use of clean energy sources as described by the ACEP and NREL reports also has the added benefits of reducing carbon emissions and building a workforce that is knowledgeable in operating and maintaining clean energy infrastructure—which is a rapidly growing portion of the global energy economy. How fortunate is it that this is also an economical path?”